Some 

Modern 

Isms 


BL  98  .J6  1919 

Johnson,  Thomas  Gary,  1859 

1936. 
Some  modern  isms 


,^^V^^  OF  M/#^ 
J  UN  21  1919 

borne  Modern  Isms 


A 


BY 
THOS.  GARY  JOHNSON 


Author  of  ''The  Southern  Presbyterian  Church,"  "John  Cal- 
vin and  the  Genevan  Reformation,"  "The  Life  and  Letters 
of  Robert  Lewis  Dabney,"  "The  Life  and  Letters  of  Benja- 
min Morgan  Palmer,"  "Virginia  Presbyterianism  and  Re- 
ligious Liberty,"  "Introduction  to  Christian  Missions" 
"Baptist  in  the  Apostolic  Age" 


PRESBYTERIAN  COMMITTEE  OF  PUBLICATION, 
RICHMOND,    VA. 


Copyright,    1919 

by 
Thos.   C.  Johnson 


Thb   Book    is   Dedicated   to 

My  Wife 

Whose  Sympathy  is 

An   Unfailing   Help. 


PREFACE 


The  lectures  in  this  volume,  on  Mormonism,  on  Chris- 
tian Science,  and  on  Russellism,  were  delivered  to  the  Senior 
Class  in  Union  Theological  Seminary  in  Virginia,  in  Janu- 
ary, 1918.  Many  who  heard  them  suggested  that  they  should 
be  published.  Brethren  here  and  there  throughout  the 
Church  have  suggested  the  same  thing.  The  present  Senior 
Class,  through  a  spokesman,  has  formally  asked  that  they 
be  printed,  if  practicable,  before  January,  1919.  In  com- 
pliance with  these  suggestions  and  requests,  those  lectures 
are  now  offered  for  publication. 

Along  with  them  a  brief  discussion  of  some  wayward  off- 
spring of  Christian  Science —  New  Thoughtism,  and  the  ism 
of  The  Unity  School  of  Christianity — and  a  discussion  of 
Nietzschism,  are  included  in  this  volume. 

It  is  hoped  that  they  will  give  a  clear  understanding  of 
the  several  issues  dealt  with,  and  serve  to  rescue  some  who 
would  otherwise  fall  into  these  errors. 

A  full  and  fair  statement  of  the  major  isms  has  been  at- 
tempted. If  rebutted  statements  are  often  brief,  it  is  be- 
cause the  fair  statement  of  the  ism  should  kill  it  with 
thoughtful  readers. 

October  10,  1918. 


Contents 


I.       MORMONISM. 

II.     Eddyism,  or  Christian  Science. 

III.  Wayward  Children  of  Mother  Eddy:  or  the  New 

Thought  People's  Ism;  and  the  Ism  of  the 
Unity  School  of  Christianity. 

IV.  Rlssellism. 
V.     Nietzsciieism. 


Literature  on  Mormonism 


Book  of  Mormon 

Orson  Pratt:   Pamphlets,  Liverpool,  1857. 

Mrs.  T.  B.  Stenhouse:     Tell  It  All. 

Progress,  No.  11,  Vol.  IIL:   The  Mormon  Church. 

John  Doyle  Lee :     The  Mormon  Menace. 

J.  W.  Gunnison:     The  Mormons. 

Encyclopedia,  Snb  Voce  Mormonism. 


Mormonism 


On  the  23d  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
1805,  Joseph  Smith  was  born  at  Sharon,  Windsor  County, 
Vermont,  of  poor,  ignorant,  thriftless  and  not  over  honest 
parents.  Along  with  them  he  removed,  ten  years  later,  to 
a  poor  farm  in  the  western  part  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
where  he  reproduced  the  shiftlessness,  ignorance,  meanness 
and  dishonesty  of  his  parents  in  his  own  character.  For 
years  in  his  youth  and  early  manhood  he  spent  much  time 
in  befooling  men  and  defrauding  them,  by  pretending  that, 
through  the  aid  of  a  marvelous  stone  which  he  possessed, 
he  could  discover  hidden  treasures,  gold  mines  and  the 
like.'^  For  such  practices  he  was  brought  before  a  justice 
of  the  peace  in  Bainbridge,  Chenango  County,  New  York, 
on  the  20th  day  of  March,  1826,  and  adjudged  guilty  of 
being  a  disorderly  person  and  an  imposter. 

Meanwhile  the  region  in  which  he  lived  had  been  visited 
by  a  religious  revival  when  he  was  about  fifteen  years  of 
age,  and  his  own  mind  had  been  wildly  agitated. 

Under  the  influence  of  this  religious  excitement  several 
members  of  the  Smith  family  joined  the  Presbyterian  Church. 
But  Joseph  was  more  inclined  to  the  Methodists.  He  tells 
us  that  he  prayed  much  to  be  guided  aright;  that  he  was 
greatly  perplexed  by  the  numbers  and  varieties  of  the  sects; 
and  that  he  saw  none  that  seemed  to  be  correct.  He  would 
have  us  believe  that,  like  Mohammed,  whom  he  more  nearly 
resembled  in  the  ethical  features  of  his  teachings  than  any 
other  with  whom  we  could  compare  him,  he  was  dissatisfied 
with  every  form  of  Christianitv  which  he  knew,  on  the  one 


*See  Gunnison:     The  History  of  the  Mormons,   pp.   88   ff. 


12  Some    Modern    Isms. 

hand,  and  equally  dissatisfied  on  the  other  with  Judaism  as 
he  saw  it. 

He  tells  us,  also,  that  he  began  to  see  visions  from  this 
time  on,  and  that  in  one  of  these  visions,  which  occurred  on 
the  night  of  the  21st  of  September,  1823,  the  angel  Moroni 
appeared  to  him  three  times,  and  told  him  that  the  Bible  of 
the  Western  Continent,  the  supplement  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, was  buried  near  the  adjacent  town  of  Manchester,  and 
that  thither  in  1827,  after  the  necessar)^  disciplinary  proba- 
tion, he  went  and  received  from  an  angel  a  stone  box,  in 
which  was  a  volume  six  inches  thick,  made  of  thin  gold 
plates  8  inches  by  7,  and  fastened  together  by  three  rings; 
that  the  plates  were  covered  with  small  writing  in  the  "re- 
formed Egyptian"  tongue,  and  that  there  was  with  them  a 
pair  of  supernatural  spectacles,  in  the  shape  of  two  crystals 
set  in  a  silver  bow,  and  called  "Urim  and  Thummin."  As 
the  illiterate  Smith  could  hardly  write,  he  employed  as 
amanuensis  Oliver  Cowdery,  to  whom,  from  behind  a  cur- 
tain, he  dictated,  as  he  claimed,  a  translation  of  the  un- 
.sealed  contents  of  the  plates.  With  the  aid  of  a  farmer  of 
some  means,  Martin  Harris,  the  copy  thus  produced  by 
Oliver  Cowdery  was  printed  and  published  in  1830,  under 
the  title  of  "The  Book  of  Mormon." 

It  was  prefaced  by  the  sworn  statement  of  Oliver  Cow- 
dery, David  Whitmer  and  Martin  Harris,  that  an  angel  of 
God  had  shown  them  the  plates  of  which  the  book  was  a 
translation. 

This  book — the  so-called  "Book  of  Momion" — in  which 
Joseph  Smith  is  declared  to  be  God's  prophet,  with  all 
power,  and  entitled  to  all  obedience,  tells  us  that  certain 
Hebrews  settled  in  America  in  600  B.  C. ;  that  they  subse- 
quently divided  over  a  question  of  leadership,  and  that  the 
victorious  party,  which  was  also  the  party  of  insubordination 
to  God,  suffered  the  darkening  of  their  skins  as  a  curse  for 


Some    Modern    Isms.  13 

their  insubordination  and  became  the  red  Indians  of  Amer- 
ica. It  tells  us  that  subsequently  the  party  of  the  servants 
of  the  Lord  became  still  smaller  through  apostasy  and  that 
finally  it  was  destroyed  by  the  Indian  Hebrews  in  the  year 
384,  A.  D.;  but  that  among  the  few  who  escaped  destruc- 
tion were  Mormon  and  his  son  Moroni;  that  Mormon  col- 
lected the  sixteen  books  of  record,  kept  by  successive  kings 
and  priests,  into  one  volume,  and  that  jNIoroni  supplemented 
the  work  of  Mormon  by  some  personal  reminiscences  and 
then  hid  the  volume  in  the  hill  of  Cumorah,  being  assured 
of  its  going,  one  day,  to  be  discovered  by  God's  chosen 
prophet. 

Such  is  the  account  of  the  water-wizzard,  the  cheat  and 
the  fraud,  Joseph  Smith,  as  to  the  origin  of  the  "Book  of 
Moniion."  In  a  part  of  this  account  he  was  at  first  sup- 
ported by  the  sworn  statement  of  his  three  friends,  Cowdery, 
Whitmer  and  Harris.  But  some  years  later,  all  three  of  these 
renounced  Mormonism  and  denounced  their  oaths  as  false. 

There  is  little  reason  for  believing  that  Joseph  Smith  ever 
was  as  profoundly  agitated  on  the  subject  of  religion  as  he 
professed;  there  is  still  less  reason  for  believing  that  he  made 
an  intelligent  study  of  either  Christianity  or  Judaism,  and 
thus  intelligently  rejected  them  as  insufficient.  There  is  the 
best  evidence  for  believing  that  the  ''Book  of  Mormon"  came 
not  through  angelic  ministrations,  but  in  quite  a  different 
way. 

The  most  of  this  book  seems  to  have  been  written  by  an 
invalid  and  crack-brained  Presbyterian  preacher,  Solomon 
Spalding,  by  name,  to  while  away  the  tedious  hours  of  his 
invalid  years.  He  had  been  accustomed  to  maintain  that  the 
Indians  of  America  were  descendants  of  some  of  the  Israelit- 
ish  tribes,  and,  in  a  period  of  infirm  health,  he  wrote  a  ro- 
mance to  support  his  views.  He  called  his  work  the  "Manu- 
script Found,"  and  tried,  but  in  vain,  to  find  a  publisher. 


14  So^EE    Modern    Isms. 

This  work  appears  to  have  fallen  into  the  hands  of  Smith, 
and  after  some  slight  manipulations,  to  have  come  out  the 
"Book  of  Mormon." 

That  Spalding's  romance  was  the  original  of  the  ''Book 
of  Mormon/'  was  the  confident  affirmation  of  contempora- 
ries of  Joseph  Smith,  who  had  examined  both  books.  And 
these  men  not  only  asserted  such  a  relation  between  the 
"Manuscript  Found"  and  the  "Book  of  Mormon,"  but  they 
proved  it  by  pointing  to  numerous  and  distinctive  names, 
phrases,  characters  and  stories  in  Spalding's*  manuscript 
which  re-appear  as  distinctive  in  Smith's  work.  And  -^o 
strong  do  they  make  their  case  that  Gentile  historians  of 
Mormonism  generally,  and  perhaps  universally,  agree  in 
taking  this  view  of  the  origin  of  the  so-called  "Book  of 
Mormon,"  as  the  most  probable. 

Joseph  Smith  gave  his  people  not  only  the  "Book  of  Mor- 
mon." In  1830,  he  claimed  to  have  received  another  reve- 
lation proclaiming  him  "seer,  translator,  prophet,  apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  elder  of  the  Church."  The  revelations, 
thus  begun,  continued  to  his  death,  in  1844.  They  include 
that  which  sanctions  polygamy  and  which  was  privately 
given,  in  the  year  1843,  to  pacify  his  lawful  wife  and  to 
silence  the  objections  of  the  saints  to  his  living  with  a 
number  of  women  whom  he  had  persuaded  to  worse  than 
polygamous  relations.  For  reasons  of  policy  this  revelation 
was  not  published  abroad  for  ten  years,  not  until  1853. 
These  revelations  to  Smith,  together  with  one  to  Brigham 
Young,  written  and  published  by  him  at  "Winter  Quar- 
ters," in  the  year  1847,  to  inspire  and  guide  the  saints  in 
their  projected  western  pilgrimage  through  the  wilderness, 
were  collected  and  published  under  the  title  of  the  "Book 
of  Doctrine  and  Covenants." 

We  suppose  an  up-to-date  "Book  of  Doctrine  and  Cove- 


♦Gunnison:     Ibid.,    pp.    93-96. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  15 

nants"  would  include  several  other  revelations,  as  for  in- 
stance, one  which,  while  still  justifying  polygamy  as  ethi- 
cally proper,  advised  its  cessation,  as  a  condition  necessary, 
in  order  to  the  admission  of  Utah  to  Statehood! 

These  are  the  two  distinctive  books  of  the  Mormons. 

They  comprise  their  "inspired  writings,"  which,  as  "mod- 
ern revelations,"  they  place  alongside  the  ancient  scriptures 
"properly  translated,"  contained  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments. In  theory  the  Monnons  hold  the  Bible  "properly 
translated,"  the  Christian  Bible,  the  "Book  of  Mormon"  and 
the  "Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants"  to  be  the  God-given 
scriptures  of  authority  and  direction.  They  hold  that  the 
Old  Testament  was  addressed  particularly  to  the  Jewish 
Church;  that  the  New  Testament  was  similarly  addressed 
to  the  Judaic  and  European  Christian  Church;  the  "Book 
of  Mormon"  to  the  American  Christian  Church,  and  the 
"Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants"  to  the  Church  of  Jesus 
Christ  of  The  Latter  Day  Saints.''' 

We  must  not,  however,  think  of  their  canon  as  being  as 
important  to  them  as  ours  to  us.  They  believe  that  con- 
tinuous revelation  is  necessary;  that  "without  new  revela- 
tion their  officers  never  could  be  qualified  to  perform  the 
various  duties  of  their  calling."  There  is  no  other  people 
more  completely  under  the  domination  of  their  priesthood. 
It  is  unlike  Christianity  in  this  respect. 

In  theory,  nevertheless,  Mormonism  is  Christianity  per- 
fected. It  is  the  theory  and  the  boast  of  Mormons  that,  as 
Christianity  surpasses  the  religion  of  the  Jewish  Dispensa- 
tion, so  Mormonism  surpasses  Christianity.  And  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  Mormon  teachers  are  constantly  making  false  appeals 
to  the  Christian  Scriptures  in  order  to  establish  Mormonism, 

*With  this  historical  sketch  of  Smith  and  the  books,  compare 
the  account  of  Bishop  Daniel  S.  Tuttle  on  "Mormons"  in  Schaff- 
Herzog-  Encyclopedia,  the  article  in  the  Encyclopedia  Britanica, 
and  especially  Orson  Pratt's  Work,  Tract  No.  6,  "Remarkable 
Visions." 


16  Some   Modern    Isms. 

as  Paul  indubitably  proved  the  truth  of  Christianity  from 
the  Old  Testament.  Monnon  propagandist  literature  is 
chock  full  of  references  to  the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
illustrating  with  indefinite  fulness  the  pregnant  saying,  "In 
religion,  what  damned  error  but  some  sober  brow  will  bless 
it  and  approve  it  with  a  text?"  Not  one  of  the  college  of  the 
apostles  quoted  scripture  with  greater  show  of  unction.  But 
this  Mormon  unction  is  the  unction  of  the  deceived,  or  the 
hypocrite;  and  the  theory  of  Mormonism,  that  it  is  a  legiti- 
mate development  of  Christianity,  is  false.  The  distinctive 
teachings  of  Mormonism  are  in  direct  and  absolute  an- 
tagonism to  those  of  Christianity.* 

Let  us  examine  them  briefly:  In  the  first  place,  the  Mor- 
mon notion  of  God,  is  that  of  an  immense  material  sub- 
stance, with  only  parts  of  it  personalized.  Naive  Material- 
ism, tritheism  with  two  only  out  of  the  three  gods  per- 
sonal, and  progressively  increasing  polytheism  are  scrouged 
into  this  notion  of  God  or  Gods.  But  let  Mormonism  speak 
for  itself: 

In  "an  epitome  of  the  faith  of  "The  Latter  Day  Saints," 
prepared  by  Joseph  Smith  himself,  the  first  article  reads, 
"We  believe  in  God,  the  Eternal  Father,  and  in  His  Son, 
Jesus  Christ,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  This  article  in  the 
Mormon  mouth  means  something  very  different  from  what 
it  does  when  pronounced  by  a  Christian.  Orson  Pratt,  per- 
haps the  most  eloquent  and  able  of  the  expounders  of  Mor- 
monism, an  apostle,  and  claiming  inspiration,  says  "The 
Godhead  consists  of  the  Father;  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  Father  is  a  material  being.  The  substance  of 
which  he  is  composed  is  wholly  material.  It  is  a  substance 
widely  different  in  some  respects  from  the  various  substances 
with  w^hich  we  are  more  inmiediately  acquainted.     In  other 


♦The  Mormonism  herein  discussed  is  Mormonism  of  the  later 
days  of  Joseph  Smith  and  of  the  time  of  Bingham  Young  and 
since. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  17 

respects  it  is  precisely  like  all  other  materials.  The  sub- 
stance of  his  person  like  other  matter,  cannot  be  in  two 
places  at  the  same  instant.  It  also  requires  time  for  him 
to  transport  himself  from  place  to  place.  It  matters  not 
how  great  the  velocity  of  his  movements,  time  is  an  essential 
ingredient  to  all  motion,  whether  rapid  or  slow.  It  differs 
from  other  matter  in  the  superiority  of  its  powers,  being 
intelligent,  all-wise,  and  possessing  the  power  of  self-motion 
to  a  far  greater  extent  than  the  coarser  materials  of  nature. 
God  is  a  Spirit,  but  that  does  not  make  him  an  immaterial 
being — a  being  that  has  no  properties  in  common  with 
matter.  The  expression,  an  immaterial  being  is  a  contra- 
diction in  tenns.  Immateriality  is  only  another  name  for 
nothing.  It  is  the  negative  of  all  existence.  A  spirit  is  as 
much  matter  as  oxygen  or  hydrogen.  It  has  many  prop- 
erties in  common  with  matter.  .  .  .  He  is  not  a  being 
without  parts,  as  modern  idolaters  teach;  for  every  whole 
is  made  up  of  parts.  The  whole  person  of  the  Father  con- 
sists of  innumerable  parts;  and  each  part  is  so  situated  as 
to  bear  certain  relations  of  distance  to  ever}-  other  part. 
There  must  also  be,  to  a  certain  degree,  a  freedom  of  mo- 
tion among  those  parts,  which  is  an  essential  condition  to 
the  movement  of  his  limbs,  w^ithout  which  he  could  only 
move  as  a  whole. 

"All  the  foregoing  statements  in  relation  to  the  person 
of  the  Father,  are  equally  applicable  to  the  person  of  the 
Son. 

"The  Holy  Spirit  being  one  part  of  the  Godhead,  is  also 
a  material  substance,  of  the  same  nature  and  properties  in 
many  respects,  as  the  Spirits  of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  It 
exists  in  vast  immeasurable  quantities  in  connection  with  all 
material  worlds.  This  is  called  God  in  the  Scriptures,  as 
well  as  the  Father  and  the  Son;  God  the  Father  and  God 
the  Son  cannot  be  everywhere  present;   indeed  they  cannot 


18  Some    Modern    Isms. 

be  even  in  two  places  at  the  same  instant;  but  God  ttie 
Holy  Spirit  is  omnipresent — it  extends  through  all  space, 
intermingling  with  all  other  matter,  yet  no  one  atom  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  can  be  in  two  places  at  the  same  instant, 
which  in  all  cases  is  an  absolute  impossibility.  It  must 
exist  in  inexhaustible  quantities,  which  is  the  only  possible 
way  for  any  substance  to  be  omnipresent.  All  the  innum- 
erable phenomena  of  universal  nature  are  produced  in  their 
origin  by  the  actual  presence  of  this  intelligent,  all-wise  and 
all-powerful  material  substance  called  the  Holy  Spirit.  It 
is  the  most  active  matter  in  the  universe,  producing  all  its 
operations  according  to  fixed  and  definite  laws  enacted  by 
itself,  in  conjunction  with  the  Father  and  Son.  What  are 
called  the  laws  of  nature  are  nothing  more  nor  less  than 
the  fixed  method  by  which  this  spiritual  matter  operates. 
Each  atom  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  intelligent,  and  like  all  other 
matter,  has  solidity,  form  and  size,  and  occupies  space.  Two 
atoms  of  this  Spirit  cannot  occupy  the  same  space  at  the 
same  time;  neither  can  one  atom,  as  before  stated,  occupy 
two  separate  spaces  at  the  same  time.  .  .  .If  several 
of  the  atoms  of  this  Spirit  should  unite  themselves  together 
into  the  form  of  a  person,  then  the  person  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  would  be  subject  to  the  same  necessity  as  the  other 
two  persons  of  the  Godhead,  that  is,  it  could  not  be  every- 
where present.  No  finite  number  of  atoms  can  be  omnipres- 
ent; an  infinite  number  of  atoms  is  required  to  be  every- 
where in  infinite  space.  Two  persons  receiving  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  do  not  each  receive  at  the  same  time  the 
same  identical  particles,  though  they  each  receive  a  sub- 
stance exactly  similar  in  kind.  It  would  be  as  impossible 
for  each  to  receive  the  same  identical  atoms,  as  it  would  be 
for  two  men  at  the  same  time  to  drink  the  same  identical 
pint  of  water."* 


*Orson  Pratt:      "Kingdom   of  God."      Part   T,   p.   49.     Tn   "Sei-ies 
of    Pamphlets."      Liverpool.      1857. 


Some    Modern    Isms,  1^ 

In  his  treatise,  "The  Kingdom  of  God,"  Part  IV.,  p.  15, 
the  "inspired  apostle,"  Pratt,  gives  a  summar}^  of  his  doc- 
trine of  God.  He  says:  "We  have  endeavored  to  point  out 
the  nature  and  character  of  the  great  supreme  governing 
power  of  the  universe,  consisting  of  the  Father,  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.  The  person  of  the  Father  consists  of  a  most 
glorious  substance,  called  spirit,  which  we  have  shown  must 
have  extension  and  parts,  and  consequently  must  be  material. 
Without  these  qualities  no  substance  could  exist. 

"The  Son  is  the  express  image  of  the  Father,  and  is  also  a 
material  being.  The  same  material  body  that  was  crucified 
and  laid  in  the  tomb,  rose  again.  The  same  flesh,  the  same 
bones,  were  reanimated  by  the  same  material  spirit.  This 
glorious  compound  of  flesh  and  bones,  and  spirit — all  mate- 
rial, ascended  into  heaven  to  dwell  in  the  presence  of  the 
glorious  personage  of  the  Father,  of  whose  express  image 
and  likeness  he  was  the  most  perfect  pattern.  Therefore 
from  the  description  given  of  Jesus  we  are  irresistibly  led 
to  the  conclusion  that  both  he  and  the  Father  must  appear, 
so  far  as  relates  to  form  and  size,  very  much  like  man.  If 
then  both  these  glorious  personages  are  about  the  size  of  man, 
they  must,  like  man,  occupy  a  finite  space  of  but  a  few 
cubic  feet  in  dimension;  and  according  to  the  admitted  truths 
of  philosophy,  no  substance  can  be  in  two  or  more  places 
at  the  same  time,  therefore  neither  the  Father  nor  Son  can, 
consistently  with  those  truths,  be  in  two  places  at  once.  Re- 
vealed truths  never  will  contradict  any  other  truths.  The 
revealed  truths  contained  in  the  Bible  inform  us  that  God 
is  everywhere,  sustaining  and  upholding  all  things,  and  that 
in  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being.  How  can 
those  important  truths  of  divine  revelation  be  reconciled 
with  other  admitted  truths  of  philosophy  which  are  equally 
certain?  They  can  be  reconciled  in  no  way  except  by  ad- 
mitting   the    omnipresence    of    the    Holy    Spirit.      This    all- 


20  So5kiE    Modern    Isms. 

powerful  substance  extends  throughout  the  material  universe, 
uniting  and  mingling  with  all  other  matter  in  a  greater  or 
less  degree,  not  absolutely  filling  all  space,  for  then  there 
would  be  no  room  for  other  matter,  but  like  the  rays  of 
light  or  heat,  existing  in  different  degrees  of  density  in  differ- 
ent parts  of  space.  By  it  all  things  are  governed  in  the 
most  perfect  order  and  wisdom,  according  to  the  will  of  the 
leather  and  the  Son.  This  view  of  the  subject  does  not  neces- 
sarily do  away  with  a  personal  spirit,  acting  in  conjunction 
with  the  other  two  persons  of  the  Godhead;  for  myriads  of 
personal  spirits  could  be  organized  out  of  the  inexhaustible 
quantities  which  exist,  and  still  an  abundance  would  be  left 
to  govern  and  control  the  various  departments  of  the  uni- 
verse where  those  personages  could  not  always  be  present." 

In  another  passage  the  great  expounder  of  Mormonism 
exclaims  at  an  enemy  for  not  seeing  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  if 
a  person,  could  not  be  omnipresent.* 

Similarly  in  a  so-called  ''Revelation"  to  Joseph  Smith, 
dated  December  27th,  1832,  the  omnipresence  of  God  by  his 
Spirit  universally  diffused,  is  taught.  There  is  no  shadow 
of  ground  for  doubt  that  Pratt  expounded  the  Mormon  doc- 
trine of  God  in  harmony  with  Smith's  teaching. 

Thus  we  have,  in  this  beggar's  basket  of  a  doctrine  of 
God,  the  assertion  of  absolute  materiality,  on  the  supposition 
that  matter  is  the  only  substance.  We  have  two  personal 
Gods — God  the  Father  and  God  the  Son — stripped  of  the 
attribute  of  omnipresence  and  by  implication  and  logic  of 
ever}^  divine  attribute.  Personality  is  denied  the  Spirit  on 
the  ground  that  to  make  him  personal  would  be  to  make  him 
finite.     He  is  turned  into  It. 

What  a  hotch-potch!  An  infinite,  material,  impersonal 
God — a  sort  of  material   soul   of  the  world — two  material, 


♦Orson   Pratt:      "Absurdities   of   Ti-nmatorialism,"    p.   25.      In    a 
Series  of  Pamphlets.     Liverpool.     1857. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  21 

finite,  personal  Gods,  making  materialism,  tritheism,  practi- 
cal atheism. 

But  this  Mormon  theolog>' — these  bizarre,  confused  and 
conflicting  representations  of  God  became  still  more  grotes- 
que, absurd  and  contradictory  when  Brigham  Young,  the 
"Prophet  of  the  Lord"  who  succeeded  Joseph  Smith,  publicly 
taught  as  he  did  on  the  9th  of  April,  1852:  "When  our 
father  Adam  came  into  the  Garden  of  Eden,  he  came  into 
it  with  a  celestial  body,  and  brought  Eve,  one  of  his  wives, 
with  him.  He  helped  to  make  and  organize  this  world.  He 
is  Michael  the  Archangel,  the  Ancient  of  Days,  about  whom 
holy  men  have  written  and  spoken.  He  is  our  Father  and 
our  God,  and  the  only  God  with  whom  we  have  to  do."* 
Mrs.  T.  B.  H.  Stenhouse,  in  her  work,  "Tell  It  All,"  or 
"The  Story  of  a  Life's  Experience  in  Mormonism,"  after 
quoting  these  words  of  Brigham  Young's,  says:  "This  public 
declaration  gave  great  offense  and  led  to  the  apostasy  of 
many.  Nevertheless,  Brigham  Young  thinks  that  just  as 
Adam  came  down  to  Eden  and  subsequently  became  a  God, 
in  like  manner  he  also  himself  will  attain  to  the  Godhead. 
Heber  C.  Kimball,  zealous  to  go  a  step  further,  declared 
that  Brigham  was  God,  'and  that  he  (Kimball)  stood  towards 
him  in  the  same  relation  as  the  Third  Person  in  the  Blessed 
Trinity  does  toward  the  First.'  "f 

Dr.  Sheldon  Jackson,  ex-Moderator  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  North,  who  "was  for  twenty  years  a  missionary 
among  the  Mormons,"  says  of  Mormonism:  "God  (God  the 
Father)  is  none  other  than  Adam  the  first  man.  Adam  mar- 
ried many  wives  here  and  begot  many  children.  He  died, 
went  to  heaven  and  was  made  God  of  Earth  because  of  his 
many  wives  and  children.  He  has  many  wives  in  heaven 
and  begets  manv  children  there  still.     Every  man  after  death 


*Mrs.   T.  B.   H.   Stenhouse:      "Tell   It  All,"   pp.    299-300. 
tMrs.   T.   B.   H.   Stenhouse:      "Tell    It  All,"   p.    300. 


22  Some    Modern    Isms. 

is  God  over  a  world,  the  magnitude  of  which  is  proportioned 
to  the  number  of  wives  and  children  he  has  here.  If  he  has 
many  wives  and  children  here  he  will  be  a  god  over  a  large 
kingdom  hereafter."'  '^''  Thus  gods  of  smaller  size  than  the 
Father  and  the  Son  are  growing  daily. 

Mrs.  Stenhouse  says,  and  truly:  "The  Confession  of 
Faith  published  by  Joseph  Smith  during  his  life  time,  w^ould 
certainly  deceive  an  uninitiated  person;  and  it  was  in  con- 
sequence of  the  ambiguity  of  that  very  document,  that  so 
many  unsuspecting  persons  were  from  the  beginning  of  Mor- 
monism  led  astray  by  the  teachings  of  the  missionaries.  The 
convert  was  told  that  Mormon  faith  proclaimed  the  existence 
of  one  true  God,  but  he  was  not  told  that  Father  Adam  was 
that  deity,  and  that  he  is  'like  a  well-to-do-farmer.'  He  was 
told  that  Christ  was  the  Son  of  God,  but  he  was  not  taught 
that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  'the  lawful  wife  of  God  the 
Father,'  and  that  he  intended  after  the  resurrection  to  take 
her  again  as  one  of  his  own  wives,  to  raise  up  immortal 
spirits  in  eternity.  ...  He  was  taught  that  the  saints 
believed  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  he  was  not  told  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  a  man,  (i.  e.,  that  a  personalized  part  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  a  man)  and  our  God.  You  think  our  Father 
and  our  God  is  not  a  lively,  sociable  and  cheerful  man.  He 
is  one  of  the  most  lively  men  that  ever  lived. "f 

If  Dr.  Sheldon  Jackson  can  be  trusted,  Mrs.  Stenhouse 
might  have  gone  still  further.  She  might  have  said :  "Though 
they  taught  men  to  have  faith  in  Christ,  they  did  not  teach 
that  the  marriage  in  Cana  of  Galilee  was  Christ's  own  mar- 
riage; that  the  Marys  and  Marthas  of  the  New  Testament 
were  wives  of  his,  and  that  he  begat  many  children  and  still 
begets   children   in   heaven. "=!"     These   esoteric   teachings   of 


♦Private  Report  of  Dr.  Jackson'.s  Address,  hv  Mr.  R.  V 
Jopling-. 

tMrs.  T.  B.  H.  Stenhouse:     "Tell  It  All,"  p.  296. 

♦Private  Report  of  Dr.  Jackson's  Address,  bv  Mr  R  V,' 
Joplingr. 


So:me    Modern    Isms.  23 

Mormonism  were  left  to  be  unfolded  later,  to  those  within 
the  pale. 

Now  place,  if  you  please,  alongside  this  mass  of  drivel- 
ling assumption,  of  discordant,  rampant  and  warring  blas- 
phemy, of  materialism,  bi-personality,  tri-personality  accord- 
ing to  some  later  teaching  of  the  tabernacle,  impersonality 
of  the  Spirit  according  to  Joseph  Smith  and  Orson  Pratt, 
ditheism,  tritheism,  polytheism,  atheism,  (for  these  gods  are 
but  men)  place,  if  you  please,  alongside  this  refuse  heap  of 
ribald  fancy  the  Christian  conception  of  God:  "God  is  a 
Spirit,  infinite,  eternal,  and  unchangeable  in  his  being,  wis- 
dom, power,  holiness,  justice,  goodness  and  truth."  "There 
are  three  persons  in  the  Godhead :  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost;  and  these  three  are  one  God  the  same  in  sub- 
stance equal  in  power  and  glory." 

The  Mormon  degradation  and  defamation  of  the  notion  of 
God  marks  it  as  no  development  of  Christianity,  but  a  most 
foul  and  blasphemous  apostasy. 

In  the  second  place,  the  Mormon  anthropology  includes 
the  doctrines  of  the  soul's  divine  origin  and  nature,  its  mate- 
riality, its  pre-existence,  its  fall  which  they  regard  as  no 
more  serious  than  Pelagians  say,  and  its  entire  ability  to 
save  itself,  once  Christ  has  died,  and  to  make  for  itself  an 
estate  of  material  happiness  in  the  world  to  come. 

Says  Elder  Franklin  D.  Richards,  of  Salt  Lake  City: 
"Mormonism  teaches  that  the  spirit  of  man  is  the  off-spring 
of  God  and  existed  as  a  living  entity  before  incorporation  into 
a  mortal  body."  f  In  "Revelation  of  May  6,  1833,"  Joseph 
Smith  teaches  that  the  spirits  of  men  are  the  offspring  of  God 
in  these  words:  "And  now  verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  was  in 
the  beginning  with  the  Father  and  am  the  first  born;  and 
all  those  who  are  together  through  me  are  partakers  of  tlie 
glory  of  the  same  and  are  the  Church  of  the  First  Born. 


•In  Progress.     No.   11.     Vol.   III.     Art,   "The   ^lormon  Church." 


24  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Ye  were  also  in  the  beginning  with  the  Father."*  Mrs. 
Stenhouse  says,  "The  soul  was  said  to  be  immortal,  and  to 
have  three  stages  of  existence.  The  first  was  the  purely 
spiritual  stage — the  stage  of  the  soul  before  it  came  into  this 
world.  Spirits  in  that  condition  were  not  perfect.  They 
must  first  take  a  fleshly  body  and  pass  through  the  trials 
of  life  before  they  could  attain  to  the  highest  state  of  exist- 
ence. Hence  it  was  the  solemn  duty  of,  as  well  as  the 
highest  privilege  of  men,  to  practice  polygamy;  their  duty, 
as  by  this  means,  and  this  alone,  the  yet  imperfect  souls, 
now  waiting  to  come  into  this  world,  could  ever  hope  to  be 
admitted  into  the  "Celestial  Kingdom," — and  a  privilege, 
as  all  the  souls  whom  they  thus  assisted  to  emigrate,  would 
form  their  own  "kingdoms"  in  eternity,  over  which  as  kings 
and  priests  they  would  reign  forever  and  ever. 

"The  second  stage  of  the  soul's  existence  is  the  mortal, 
with  which  we  are  all  sadly  acquainted.  The  third  is  the 
condition  subsequent  to  the  Resurrection,  when  they  believe 
the  flesh  and  bones  will  form  the  raised  body,  but  that  the 
blood  v/ill  not  be  there;  for  the  blood  is  the  principle  of 
the  corrupt  life,  and  therefore  another  spirit  supplies  its  place 
in  heaven. 

"That  Christ  partook  of  some  broiled  fish  and  part  of  a 
honey  comb  is  evident  from  Holy  Scripture.  The  Mormons 
therefore  teach  that  heaven  will  be  very  much  the  same  as 
earth,  only  considerably  improved.  We  shall  not  marry 
there  or  be  given  in  marriage;  hence  it  is  necessary  for  us 
to  marry  here,  and  to  marry  as  much  as  we  can,  for  then  in 
heaven  the  man  will  take  the  wives  whom  he  had  married 
on  earth,  or  who  have  been  sealed  to  him  by  proxy;  they 
will  be  his  queens  and  their  children  will  be  his  subjects. 
We  shall  eat  and  drink  and  spend  a  happy  time  generally. 
We  shall  thenceforth  never  die — thence  we  shall  ourselves 
be  Gods! 


^Quoted  "In  Progress."     Vol.  Ill,     No.  11,  p.  686. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  25 

"It  was  in  the  pre-existent  state,  the  Mormon  tells  us, 
that  the  work  of  salvation  was  first  planned — but  not  after 
the  fashion  believed  by  all  Christians.  A  grand  celestial 
council  was  held,  at  which  all  the  sons  of  God  appeared. 
Michael  the  father  of  all,  presided  and  stated  that  he  pro- 
posed to  create  a  new  world,  of  which  he  proceeded  to  give 
some  details.  His  first  begotten  then  arose,  and  made  a 
speech  in  which  he  proposed  that  Michael,  his  father,  should 
go  down  to  the  world,  when  created,  with  Eve  his  mother, 
and  do  there  much  after  the  fashion  of  what  is  related  of 
our  first  parents  in  the  book  of  Genesis;  he  himself  would 
descend  some  thousands  of  years  subsequently,  and  would 
lead  his  erring  brethren  back,  and  save  them  from  their 
sins.  Lucifer  the  second  son  then  stood  forth  and  unfolded 
his  plan.  Jealous  of  the  popularity  of  his  brother,  he  pro- 
posed to  save  men  in  their  sins. 

"Great  discussion  ensued,  in  which  the  unnumbered  fam- 
ily of  heaven  divided  into  three  parties — one  under  each> 
of  the  two  elder  sons,  and  the  third  standing  neutral.  After 
a  terrible  conflict,  the  second  son,  was  defeated,  and  with 
all  his  followers  was  driven  out  of  heaven.  They  descended 
into  the  abyss  where  they  founded  the  infernal  kingdom,  of 
which  Lucifer  became  the  chief.  He  was  henceforth  known 
as  the  Devil.  (Michael  or)  Adam  created  his  world  and 
carried  out  his  part  of  the  plan;  and  in  due  time  the  eldest 
son,  who  conquered  in  heaven,  took  upon  him  the  form  of 
flesh,  dwelt  among  men  and  was  known  as  their  Redeemer. 
The  spirits  who  stood  neutral  during  the  conflict  subse- 
quently took  upon  them  forms  of  flesh,  entering  into  the 
children  of  Ham,  and  were  known  as  negroes.  Therefore 
it  is,  that  although  the  American  Indians  and  all  other 
races  are  eligible  for  the  Mormon  priesthood,  the  negro 
alone  can  never  attain  to  that  high  dignity."*  Such  is  the 
Mormon  anthropology^ 

•Mrs.  T.  B.  H.  Stenhouse:     "Tell  It  All,"   pp.   297-299. 


26  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Since  the  time  of  Plato,  and  perhaps  before,  the  intel- 
lectual world  has  been  acquainted  with  the  fancy  of  the  pre- 
existence  of  souls  and  has  regarded  it  as  baseless.  But  the 
Mormons  suppose  all  souls  to  have  existed  eternally  and  in 
an  imperfect  state.  In  the  first  pair  on  earth,  their  Father, 
God,  Michael,  Adam,  or  whatever  he  may  be  called,  and  his 
wife,  the  race  fell  further,  but  owing  to  the  redemptive  work 
of  Christ  no  man  suffers  for  this  primeval  earth's  sin.  They 
teach  that  men  are  naturally  able  to  comply  with  the  re- 
quirements which  entitle  to  salvation,  f  They  teach  a  view 
of  heavenly  man  about  as  grossly  sensual  as  the  Mohamme- 
dans, but  in  other  respects  like  the  Pelagians. 

Compare  now  with  this  puerile,  superficial,  absurd  and 
palpably  false,  vagarious,  and  heathen  view  of  man,  with 
its  accompanying  defamation  of  God,  the  Christian  doc- 
trine as  to  man's  creation,  fall,  sinfulness,  moral  helpless- 
ness, salvation  by  grace  if  at  all,  freedom  in  Christ,  every- 
thing through  Christ: 

''God  created  man  male  and  female,  after  his  own 
image,  in  knowledge,  righteousness  and  holiness.  When 
God  created  man,  he  entered  into  a  covenant  of  life 
with  him  on  condition  of  perfect  obedience.  Our  first 
parents,  being  left  to  the  freedom  of  their  own  will,  fell 
from  the  estate  wherein  they  were  created  by  sinning  against 
God.  The  fall  brought  mankind  into  an  estate  of  sin  and 
mise^^^  The  sinfulness  of  that  estate  whereinto  man  fell, 
consisted  of  the  guilt  of  Adam's  first  sin,  the  want  of  original 
righteousness,  and  the  corruption  of  his  whole  nature,  which 
is  commonly  called  original  sin,  together  with  all  actual 
transgressions  which  proceed  from  it.  But  God,  having  out 
of  his  mere  good  pleasure  from  all  eternity  elected  some  to 
everlasting  life,  did  enter  into  a  covenant  of  grace,  to  de- 
liver them  out  of  the  estate  of  sin  and  misery,  and  to  bring 
them  into  an  estate  of  salvation  bv  a  Redeemer." 


fCompare   Ben.   E.    Rich:      "A   Friendly   Discussion."   p.    11. 


Some    Modern    Isisis.  27 

Christianity  teaches  that  man  was  created  by  God.  It 
teaches  the  doctrine  of  ex  nihilo  creation.  ]Mormonism 
teaches  the  eternity  of  matter,  and  regards  the  souls  of  men 
as  a  part  of  that  eternal  matter.  Christianity  teaches  that 
mankind  fell  in  Adam,  our  ancestral  head,  from  an  estate 
of  holiness.  Mormonism  teaches  that  souls  in  an  imperfect 
state  were  embodied  as  a  necessary  stage  in  their  progress 
toward  perfection.  Christianity  teaches  the  moral  helpless- 
ness of  man  and  the  need  of  divine  grace  in  order  to  sal- 
vation. Mormonism  teaches  that  man  can  do  everything 
necessary  to  salvation  once  the  eldest  son  of  the  Michael, 
who  became  Adam,  has  died  in  the  race's  behalf.  Mor- 
monism looks  forward  to  a  heaven  of  sensuality  much  like 
that  of  Mohammed.  Christianity  looks  forward  to  a  heaven 
in  which  fleshly  appetites  have  no  scope.  Mormonism  is  no 
development  of  Christianity.  It  is  another  gospel  than 
that  which  Paul  preached. 

In  the  third  place,  the  Mormon  doctrines  of  soteriology 
are  equally  crude  and  unchristian. 

Joseph  Smith  says,  in  his  Articles  of  Faith,  "We  believe 
that,  through  the  atonement  of  Christ,  all  mankind  may  be 
saved,  by  obedience  to  the  laws  and  ordinances  of  the  Gospel. 
We  believe  that  these  ordinances  are:  First,  faith  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ;  second,  repentance;  third,  baptism  by 
immersion  for  remission  of  sins;  fourth,  laying  on  of  hands 
for  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."=^ 

The  theory  of  the  Mormons  is  that  the  sacrifice  of  Christ 
so  far  does  away  with  the  effect  of  Adams'  sins  that  all  men 
suffer  for  their  own  individual  sins  only.  Moreover  the 
sacrificial  death  of  Christ,  they  teach,  so  far  clears  the  way 
that  man  can  save  himself.  They  describe  faith  as  fol- 
lows: They  who  believe  "Must  believe,  first,  in  the  exist- 
ence of  God;  secondly,  in  his  revealed  law;  and  thirdly,  in 


•Articles   of  Faith.    3   and   4. 


28  Some    Modern    Isms. 

the  sufferings  of  the  Son  of  God"*  as  satisfying  divine 
justice.  They  define  repentance  with  more  apparent  ade- 
quacy. They  teach  that  immersion  is  the  only  mode  of  hap- 
tism  sanctioned  by  our  Lord.  They  say  also  that  "baptism 
is  not,  as  many  false  teachers  now  affinn,  'an  outward  sign 
of  an  invisible  grace,'  but  is  an  ordinance  whereby  a  be- 
lieving penitent  obtains  a  forgiveness  of  all  past  sins."t 
They  thus  teach  the  ex  opere  operato  theory  of  the  efficiency 
of  the  sacrament.  They  make  water  baptism  to  be  essen- 
tial to  salvation,  as  well  as  baptism  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Joseph  Smith  teaches  this  in  "Revelation"  dated  November, 
1831.  He  represents  Christ  as  saying,  "Verily,  verily,  I 
say  unto  you,  they  that  believe  not  on  your  words  and  are 
not  baptized  in  water  in  my  name  for  the  remission  of  their 
sins,  that  they  may  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  shall  be  damned 
and  shall  not  come  into  my  father's  kingdom.";]:  The 
Mormons  also  teach  that  after  a  man  has  believed  and  re- 
pented and  been  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  he  must 
then  receive  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,^ 
and  so  be  empowered  to  heal  the  sick  and  work  miracles 
generally. 

Now  observe  that  this  soteriology  of  Mormonism  is  funda- 
mentally unlike  that  of  Christianity.  The  Christian  system 
is  the  plan  of  the  uncreated  and  independent  tri-personal 
God  for  saving  one  who  is  a  creature  in  the  absolute  sense 
of  the  term  creature.  The  Mormon  system  is  the  plan  by 
which  persons  called  "eternal"  try  to  save  other  beings 
equally  eternal  and  uncreated.  Christianity  represents  the 
atonement  as  an  infinite  satisfaction  by  a  person  of  the 
triune  Godhead  to  divine  justice,  for  the  sin  of  finite  beings. 
Mormonism  represents  the  atonement  as  a  satisfaction  by 
one  of  two  persons  clothed,  inconsistently,  with  some  of  the 

•Orson    Pratt:      "Kingdom    of  God."      Part   II,    pp.    3.    4 
tOrson   Pratt:      "Kingrdom   of  God."     Part  II,   pp.   4     5 
JQuoted   in   Progress.     Vol.   III.     No.   11,  p.   687. 
IBen.   E.    Rich:      "A  Friendly   Discussion,"   pp.    15,    16. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  29 

divine  attributes  for  the  sin  of  beings  not  their  creatures, 
and  also  clothed  with  the  same  metaphysical  attributes. 
Mormonism  represents  faith  as  purely  intellectual.  Chris- 
tianity represents  it  as  of  the  heart  as  well  as  the  head.  We 
distinguish  between  the  mere  historical  faith  of  the  in- 
tellect which  even  devils  may  have  and  that  faith  of  the 
mind  and  heart  and  whole  man  which  the  child  of  God 
must  have.  Repentance  in  the  two  systems,  notwithstand- 
ing any  superficial  likeless,  is  essentially  unlike,  since  God, 
sin  and  sinner,  are  different  things  as  seen  by  Mormons 
and  by  the  teachings  of  Christianity.  The  Mormons  clothe 
baptism  with  water  with  an  efficiency  which  is  never  af- 
firmed nor  implied  of  it  in  Scriptures,  and  which  is  never 
taught  even  by  any  branch  of  nominal  Christians  but  the 
most  apostate  and  superstitious.  Nay,  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  any  branch  of  the  nominally  Christian  church,  even 
the  most  apostate  and  degraded,  has  taught  sacramentalism 
so  fully.  The  Mormons  are  like  a  few  Christian  enthusiasts 
indeed,  in  claiming  that  the  maraculous  gifts  of  the  apostolic 
age  are  continued  in  this  age.  But  here,  too,  they  stand  in 
sharp  contrast  to  the  very  best  and  noblest  part  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  in  all  ages  and  countries  save  the  darkest. 

But  we  are  not  yet  done  with  the  Mormon  soteriology. 
They  tell  us  that  "the  living  saints  may  perform  ordinances 
for  the  repentant  dead."  And  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  dis- 
covery of  repentance  on  the  part  of  the  dead  does  not  seem 
difficult.  Accordingly,  Queen  Anne  of  England,  George 
Washington,  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  and  how  many  others 
time  would  fail  us  to  tell,  have  been  baptized  by  proxy  into 
the  Mormon  communion. 

Marriage  is  an  element  in  Mormon  soteriology.  They 
call  it  a  sacrament.  They  say  "it  is  solemnized  for  time  and 
for  eternity.  It  is  sealed  on  earth  by  one  having  divine 
authorit^^  and   it  is  therefore  sealed   in  heaven. 


30  Some    Modern    Isms. 

This  union  of  the  sexes  is  essential  to  perfect  exaltation  in 
the  celestial  world.  The  marriage  does  not  take  place  in 
or  after  the  resurrection,  but  in  this  life,  where  the  parties 
are  tested  in  their  probation.  Those  persons  who  arrive  at 
no  higher  conditions  than  that  of  angels,  are  ministering 
spirits  unto  the  sons  and  daughters  of  God."*  That  is, 
those  who  are  not  married  after  the  Mormon  fashion  shall 
be  underlings,  scullions  and  kitchen-maids  in  heaven.  For 
woman  or  man,  according  to  Mormonism,  the  way  to  the 
heaven  of  heavens  is  through  marriage.  Those  who  do  not 
marry,  even  if  they  reach  the  celestial  portals,  must  be 
hewers  of  wood,  drawers  of  water,  attendants  and  boot- 
blacks to  the  saints,  t 

We  have  now  passed  in  rapid  review  the  Mormon  doc- 
trines of  God,  of  man,  and  of  salvation.  We  have  seen 
that  instead  of  holding  to  Christian  theism,  they  hold  to 
materialism,  tritheism  in  union  with  the  impersonality  of 
one  of  the  gods,  the  other  two  gods  being  little  more  than 
indefinitely  big  men.  We  have  seen  that  they  make  man 
an  eternal  material  being,  who  existed  before  he  was  clothed 
with  flesh,  who  was  clothed  with  flesh  in  order  to  improve- 
ment of  character,  and  getting  rid  of  original  imperfections, 
but  who  tumbled  into  more  trouble  in  the  person  of  God 
the  Father  who  became  Adam,  but  was  redeemed  by  his 
eldest  son  who  became  Christ,  and  hence  is  able  to  work 
out  his  own  salvation  by  obeying  gospel  ordinances.  We 
have  seen  that  they  make  this  Christ  work  out  a  sort  of  an 
atonement;  that  they  then  condition  a  man's  salvation  on 
his  entertaining  intellectual  faith,*  on  his  having  repented 
of  his  past  and  determined  to  live  according  to  their  teach- 
ings, on  baptism  by  water,  on  receiving  the  miraculous  pow- 


♦Elder  F.   D.   Richards:      "In   Progress."     Vol.    III.     Xo.    11.   p. 
r.85.     See  also,   "Tell   It  All,"  p.   257. 
tSee    "Tell    It   All,"    p.    257. 

♦The    uninspired    elder,    Ben.    E.    Rich,    has    a    better   view    of 
faith. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  31 

ers  of  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the  imposition  of  hands,  and  on 
his  marrying  under  the  Mormon  authorities. 

This  system  has  no  kinship  with  Christianity.  As  the 
"Book  of  Mormon"  uses  a  few  phrases  found  frequently  in 
our  Sacred  Scriptures,  such  as,  "And  it  came  to  pass,"  so 
the  Mormon  system  is  set  forth  by  the  use  of  our  Christian 
terminology  in  part.  As  we  have  the  words  God,  Lord, 
Christ,  man,  sin,  salvation,  atonement,  faith,  repentance,  bap- 
tism, and  so  forth,  so  Mormonism  has  these  words.  But 
the  meanings  in  every  case  are  different.  Mormonism  is  no 
development  of  Christianity,  but  the  contrary.  It  is  a  re- 
ligion as  unchristian  as  Manichaeism,  or  Mohammedanism. 
It  is  a  true  child  of  its  founder,  Joseph  Smith,  the  cheat, 
the  fraud,  the  liar  and  the  devotee  of  lust. 

The  essentially  contra- Christian  character  of  Mormonism 
may  be  shown  still  more  convincingly  by  examining  some 
distinctive  peculiarities  of  Mormon  ethics,  viz. :  polygamy, 
and  the  unusual  distinction  between  innocent  and  guilty 
blood,  the  blood  atonement  or  the  principle  that  the  end 
justifies  the  means. 

In  1843,  in  Nauvoo,  Joseph  Smith  claimed  to  receive  a 
revelation  from  God  sanctioning  a  plurality  of  wives.  The 
revelation  is  long,  full  of  argument  and  assertions  warrant- 
ing polygamy.     Paragraphs  20  to  25  read  as  follows: 

"Verily,  I  say  unto  you,  a  commandment  I  give  unto  mine 
handmaid,  Emma  Smith,  your  wife.  .  .  .  Let  mine 
handmaid,  Emma  Smith,  receive  all  those  that  have  been 
given  unto  my  servant  Joseph,  and  who  are  virtuous  and 
pure  before  me;  and  those  that  are  not  pure  and  have  said 
that  they  were  pure,  shall  be  destroyed,  saith  the  Lord  your 
God.  ...  I  give  unto  my  servant  Joseph  that  he 
may  be  made  ruler  over  many  things,  for  he  hath  been 
faithful  over  a  few  things,  and  from  henceforth  I  will 
strengthen  him. 


32  Some   Modern    Isms. 

*'And  I  command  mine  handmaid,  Emma  Smith,  to  abide 
and  cleave  unto  my  servant  Joseph,  and  to  no  one  else. 
But  if  she  will  not  abide  this  commandment,  she  shall  be 
destroyed,  saith  the  Lord;  for  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  and 
will  destroy  her  if  she  abide  not  in  my  law;  but  if  she 
will  abide  this  commandment,  then  shall  my  servant  Joseph 
do  all  things  for  her  even  as  he  hath  said;  and  I  will  bless 
him,  and  multiply  him,  and  give  unto  him  a  hundred  fold 
in  this  world,  of  fathers  and  mothers,  brothers  and  sisters, 
houses  and  lands,  wives  and  children,  and  crowns  of  eternal 
lives  in  the  eternal  world.  And,  again,  verily  I  say,  let 
mine  handmaid  forgive  my  servant  Joseph  his  trespasses, 
and  then  shall  she  be  forgiven  her  trespasses,  wherein  she 
has  trespassed  against  me;  and  I,  the  Lord  thy  God,  will 
bless  her,  and  multiply  her,  and  make  her  heart  to  re- 
joice. 

"And  again,  as  pertaining  to  the  law  of  the  priesthood: 
If  any  man  espouse  a  virgin,  and  desire  to  espouse  another, 
and  the  first  give  her  consent,  and  if  he  espouse  the  second, 
and  they  are  virgins  and  have  vowed  to  no  other  man,  then 
is  he  justified;  he  cannot  commit  adultery,  for  they  are  given 
him,  and  to  none  else;  and  if  he  have  ten  virgins  given  unto 
him  by  this  law,  he  cannot  commit  adultery,  for  they  belong 
to  him;  and  they  are  given  unto  him — therefore  he  is 
justified.  But  if  one  or  either  of  the  ten  virgins,  after  she 
is  espoused,  shall  be  with  another  man,  she  has  committed 
adultery;  she  shall  be  destroyed;  for  they  are  given  unto 
him  to  multiply  and  replenish  the  earth,  according  to  my 
commandments,  and  to  fulfill  the  promise  which  was  given 
by  my  Father  before  the  foundation  of  the  world;  and  for 
their  exaltation  in  the  eternal  worlds,  that  they  may  bear 
the  souls  of  men;  for  herein  is  the  work  of  my  Father  con- 
tinued til  at  he  may  be  glorified. 

"And  again,  verily,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  if  any  man 


Soi^iE    Modern    Isms.  33 

have  a  wife  who  holds  the  keys  of  this  power,  and  he  teaches 
unto  her  the  law  of  my  priesthood,  as  pertaining  to  these 
things,  then  shall  she  believe  and  administer  unto  him,  or 
she  shall  be  destroyed,  saith  the  Lord  your  God;  for  I  will 
destroy  her;  for  I  will  magnify  my  name  upon  all  those 
who  receive  and  abide  by  my  law.  Therefore,  it  shall  be 
lawful  for  him  to  receive  all  things  whatsoever  I  the  Lord 
his  God,  will  give  unto  him,  because  she  did  not  believe 
and  administer  unto  him,  according  to  my  word,  and  she 
then  becomes  the  transgressor,  and  he  is  exempt  from  the 
law  of  Sarah,  who  administered  unto  Abraham  according  to 
the  law,  when  I  commanded  x\braham  to  take  Hagar  to 
wife.  And  now,  as  pertaining  to  this  law:  Verily,  verily 
I  say  unto  you,  I  will  reveal  more  unto  you  hereafter;  there- 
fore let  this  suffice  for  the  present.  Behold  I  am  Alpha 
and  Omega.     Amen." 

This  quotation  shows  us  how  restive  Emma  Smith, 
Joseph's  first  and  lawful  wife,  was  under  polygamy.  The 
threats  of  destruction  which  were  intended  to  subdue  her, 
betray  also  the  nervous  uneasiness  of  the  polygamous  prophet. 
The  incongruous  plea  that  Emma  shall  forgive  the  tres- 
passes of  Joseph  against  her,  betrays  the  prophet's  own 
sense  of  the  immorality  of  his  polygamous  relations.  But, 
cheat,  liar,  fraud,  libertine,  coward  as  he  was,  he  naturally 
invoked  the  authority  of  the  God  whom  he  dishonored  with 
his  every  breath,  in  reducing  the  wife  he  ought  to  have  pro- 
tected, to  the  intolerable  ignominy  of  polygamy. 

This  is  not  only  anti-Christian;  it  is  in  the  teeth  of  the 
teaching  of  natural  religion.  Go  to  Utah.  Visit  the  homes 
of  Polygamy.  In  this  yard  is  a  row  of  small  houses,  much 
alike,  three  or  four,  half  a  dozen,  or  a  dozen  or  more  of 
them,  each  inhabited  by  a  polygamous  wife  of  the  same  man. 
In  an  adjacent  yard  is  a  single  house  with  a  number  of 
rooms,  in  every  room  save  one,  the  parlor,  a  wife  and  her 


34  Some    Modern    Isms. 

children,  all  belonging  to  one  man.  In  still  another  yard 
is  a  cabin  with  one  room  in  which  a  man  lives  with  a  plu- 
rality of  wives.  See  the  prevalent  look  of  hopelessness  on 
the  women's  faces,  save  in  the  cases  of  new-comers,  tempo- 
rary queens  of  the  harems,  a  few  fanatics,  and  hardened 
wretches.  See  in  this  land  of  boasted  freedom  these  slaves. 
See  in  this  vaunted  civilization  this  sign  of  blackest  sav- 
agery. 

Ye  men  who  hear  me  as  well  as  ye  women:  is  not  this 
against  the  demands  of  your  highest  nature?  Is  not  con- 
jugal love  exclusive  in  its  demands?  Is  it  not  exclusive  in 
proportion  to  a  man's  elevation  of  character?  Don't  you 
count  that  man  close  akin  to  a  beast  who  would  be  willing 
to  live  in  relations  of  polyandry?  Does  not  logic  compel 
you  to  take  a  similar  view  of  woman  and  polygamy?  Can 
you  think  of  yourself  with  any  degree  of  moral  complacency 
as  living  in  polygamy?  There  is  not  a  man  here  who  will 
dare  say  it  openly ! 

The  Bible  condemns  it.  The  original  institutions  of 
marriage,  of  which  we  have  record  in  Genesis  2:24,  is  strictly 
and  only  monogamous.  Moses  restricted  polygamy.  Malachi 
rebuked  it.  Christ  roundly  condemned  it,  and  re-established 
the  monogamous  character  of  marriage.  His  inspired  apos- 
tles set  a  stigma  of  disapproval  on  polygamy  by  forbidding 
that  any  polygamous  man  should  be  allowed  to  hold  office 
in  the  church. 

Joseph  Smith  did  not  get  his  revelation  sanctioning  poly- 
gamy from  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day 
and  forever. 

The  Mormon  distinction  between  murder  and  the  shed- 
ding of  innocent  blood,  was  in  the  words  of  Mrs.  Stenhouse 
as  follows:  "Shedding  innocent  blood  is  the  crime  of  kill- 
ing a  saint,  which  can  never  be  forgiven  but  by  the  death 
of  the  transgressor;  but  the  spilling  of  a  Gentile's  blood  is 


Some   Modern    Isms.  3.5 

of  quite  a  different  character.  To  murder  a  Gentile  may 
sometimes  be  inexpedient,  or  perhaps  even  to  a  certain  extent 
a  wrong,  but  it  is  seldom  if  ever,  a  crime,  and  never  an  un- 
pardonable sin." 

Scores  and  hundreds  of  inoffensive  immigrants  passing 
through  Utah  were  cut  down  by  the  agents  of  the  Mormon 
church.  In  1857,  one  hundred  and  twenty-one  persons — 
men,  women  and  children — belonging  to  an  immigrant  train 
peaceably  making  its  way  through  the  country,  were  brutally 
put  to  death  in  what  is  known  as  the  Mountain  Meadow's 
massacre.  This  wholesale  murder  was  under  the  field  lead- 
ership of  Bishop  John  Doyle  Lee,  and  was  instigated  and 
approved  by  the  highest  Mormon  authorities,  including  Brig- 
ham  Young.  Lee,  according  to  his  published  confessions, 
believed  the  murder  fully  justified,  because  commanded  by 
Mormon  authorities  above  him.* 

The  doctrine  of  the  Blood  Atonement  is,  to  quote  Airs. 
Stenhouse  again,  "that  the  murder  of  an  apostale  is  a  deed 
of  love  I  If  a  saint  sees  another  leave  the  church,  or  even 
if  he  only  believes  that  his  brother's  faith  is  weakening  and 
he  will  apostatize  before  long,  he  knows  that  the  soul  of  his 
unbelieving  brother  will  be  lost  if  he  dies  in  such  a  state, 
and  that  only  by  his  blood's  being  shed  is  there  any  chance 
for  forgiveness  for  him;  it  is  therefore  the  kindest  action 
that  he  can  perform  toward  him  to  shed  his  blood — the 
doing  so  is  a  deed  of  truest  love.  The  nearer,  the  dearer, 
the  more  tenderly  loved  the  sinner  is,  the  greater  the  affection 
shown  by  the  shedders  of  blood.  The  action  is  no  longer 
murder  or  the  shedding  of  innocent  blood,  for  the  taint  of 
apostasy  takes  away  its  innocence — it  is  making  atonement, 
not  a  crime;  it  is  an  act  of  mercy,  therefore  meritorious.''* 

Brigham  Young  said  in  one  of  his  sermonts  in  the  Salt 


*The  Mormon  Menace,  or  The  Confessions  of  John  i:>oyle  Lee, 
pp.   298ff. 

*.Mrs.    T.   B.   H.   Stenhouse:      "Tell    It   All,"   p.    312. 


36  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Lake  City  Tabernacle,  "I  have  known  a  great  many  men 
who  have  left  this  church  for  whom  there  is  no  chance 
whatever  of  exaltation,  but  if  their  blood  had  been  spilled 
it  would  have  been  better  for  them, 

"The  wickedness  and  ignorance  of  the  nations  forbid  this 
principle's  being  in  full  force.  But  the  time  will  come  when 
the  law  of  God  will  be  in  full  force.  This  is  loving  our 
neighbor  as  ourselves.  If  he  needs  help,  help  him;  if  he 
w^ants  salvation,  and  it  is  necessary  to  spill  his  blood  on  the 
earth  in  order  that  he  may  be  saved,  spill  it. 

"Now,  brethren  and  sisters,  will  you  live  your  religion? 
How  many  hundreds  of  times  have  I  asked  that  question? 
Will  the  Latter  Day  Saints  live  their  religion?"! 

On  other  occasions  he  said:  "I  could  refer  to  plenty  of 
instances  where  men  have  been  righteously  slain  in  order  to 
atone  for  their  sins. 

"Now,  when  you  hear  my  brethren  telling  about  cutting 
people  off  from  the  earth,  that,  you  consider,  is  strong  doc- 
trine; but  it  is  to  save  them,  not  to  destroy  them."]; 

It  is  to  be  remarked  that  one  can  commit  apostacy  simply 
by  crossing  the  will  of  a  living  member  of  the  Mormon  priest- 
hood. Accordingly  "Rosmos  Anderson,  who  wanted  to  marry- 
his  step-daughter  against  the  wishes  of  the  ward  bishop,  had 
his  throat  cut  by  the  ecclesiastical  executioners,  so  that  his 
blood  might  run  into  his  freshly  dug  grave."*  John  Doyle 
Lee  saysf  that  this  ward  Bishop,  Klingensmith,  wishing  to 
marry  the  girl  himself,  was  one  of  Anderson's  executioners; 
but  that  the  killing  was  a  religious  duty  and  a  just  act. 

The  inculcation  of  those  principles  and  the  example  of 
Mormon  elders  explain  in  considerable  part  the  peculiarly 
long  list  of  murders  and  other  horrors  in  the  history  of  Utah. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  forbade  the  use  of  force  of  anv  kind  in 


tQuoted   in   "Tell  It  All,"   p.   318. 
:|:.Tohn   Doyle   Lee:      The   Mormon   Menace,   p.    357. 
"International   Encyclopedia.   Sub   Mormons. 
2tThe  Mormon  :\Ienace,  pp.   292ff. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  37 

religion.  It  has  been  a  law  of  God  for  the  State  from  the 
time  of  Noah:  *'Who  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall 
his  blood  be  shed."  But  the  Mormon  law  makes  a  Mormon's 
murder  of  a  Gentile  no  crime  and  teaches  the  slaughter  of 
a  Mormon  on  the  point  of  apostalizing  a  virtuous  act. 
Nothing  more  diabolical  can  be  found  in  the  moral  teach- 
ings of  any  people  than  these  principles  of  Mormon  ethics. 

Such  is  the  Mormon  theology  and  ethics.  They  claim 
that  they  are  a  development  of  Christianity.  But  what  con- 
cord hath  Christ  with  Belial?  Mormonism  is  not  of  the 
Old  Testament  nor  the  New.  It  treats  of  a  different  God, 
of  a  different  salvation,  accomplished  by  different  means,  of 
different  ideals  of  life  and  duty.  While  Christianity  is 
from  heaven  and  bears  writ  all  over  it,  its  celestial  character, 
Mormonism  is  the  monstrous  offspring  of  earth  and  hell. 

It  is  a  huge  monster  that  would  roll  back  civilization 
thousands  of  years  and  grind  the  weaker  sex  as  degraded 
orientals,  or  brutal  and  naked  savages,  do.  It  would  re- 
establish in  our  Western  world,  blessed  of  high  heaven  with 
independence  of  Church  and  State,  that  adulterous  com- 
munion from  which  comes  the  motley  brood,  Intolerance, 
Priestcraft  and  Persecution  unto  death. 

Mormonism  aims  to  control  this  nation  in  its  politics  as 
it  tries  to  control  Utah. 

We  are  told  that  in  the  State  of  Utah  no  Mormon  can  be 
a  candidate  for  office  of  any  kind  save  one  authorized  by 
the  President  of  the  Church,  and  that  he  will  authorize  no 
one  but  an  actual  and  avowed  polygamist;  that  no  bill  can 
pass  the  legislature  save  by  the  consent  of  the  Mormon 
Church;  that  all  objectionable  bills  are  strangled  in  the  com- 
mittee rooms;  that  the  church  has  a  committee  to  devise  and 
supervise  all  legislation;  that  their  approval  means  passage 
and  their  disapproval  failure;  that  all  schools  are  in  the 
hands  of  Monnons,  even  the  State  University  and  the  Agri- 


3S  Some    Modern    Isims. 

cultural  School,  which  is  largely  supported  by  the  aid  of 
the  National  Government;  and  that  all  of  these  are  branches 
of  tlie  Mormon  propaganda.*  If  this  be  regarded  as  an 
over-statement  of  their  power  in  Utah,  it  may  nevertheless 
be  taken  as  a  just  exhibition  of  their  aim. 

Mormonism  would  turn  right  into  wrong  and  wrong  into 
right.  It  would  deprive  us  of  that  God  who  is  glorious  in 
holiness,  fearful  in  praises,  doing  wonders;  and  give  us  in- 
stead its  gods  witli  ethical  ideals  lower  than  Jesuitism  ever 
reached  in  its  lowest  grovelings. 

We  have  called  this  monster  huge.  It  has  grown  great 
and  is  still  growing.  It  has  met  obstacles  many.  Its  wan- 
derings from  1831  to  1847  are  matters  of  familiar  history. 
Hundreds  of  Mormons  have  perished  at  the  hands  of  their 
incensed  neighbors.  Elder  Richards,  speaking  from  the 
point  of  view  of  a  Latter  Day  Saint,  said  about  a  score  of 
years  ago:  "Persecution  raged  against  the  church  from 
the  beginning.  All  kinds  of  misrepresentation  were  resorted 
to  by  its  enemies.  The  Saints  were  driven  from  their  pos- 
sessions in  Missouri  and  afterwards  in  Illinois;  many  of 
them  were  slaughtered  by  mobs,  their  property  was  confis- 
cated, and  in  1844,  on  June  27th,  the  Prophet  Joseph  Smith 
and  his  brother  Hiram  were  shot  to  death  by  Mobocrats 
with  blackened  faces,  at  Cartharge,  Illinois.  Subsequently 
the  body  of  the  Saints  were  driven  from  Nauvoo,  which 
they  had  built  on  the  banks  of  the  Mississippi,  and  under 
the  leadership  of  Brigham  Young,  who  was  the  President 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  the  persecuted  Saints  made  their 
way  to  winter  quarters,  on  the  banks  of  the  Missouri,  near 
where  Council  Bluff  now  stands.  ...  In  1847  the 
famous  journey  from  the  Missouri  river  across  the  plains 
and  mountains  was  accomplished  by  Brigham  Young  and 
the  pioneers,  numbering  one  hundred  and  forty-three  men, 


*R.  W.  Jopling's  Report  of  Dr.  Sheldon   Jackson's  Address. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  39 

three  women  and  two  children.  They  reached  the  spot 
where  Salt  Lake  City  now  stands,  July  24th  of  that  year. 
The  great  temple,  costing  more  than  three  million  dollars, 
rear  its  towers  on  the  spot  where  Brigham  Young  de- 
clared at  that  time:  'Here  we  will  build  the  temple  of  our 
God.' 

"The  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day  Saints  has 
now  its  branches  in  all  the  civilized  nations  and  upon  many 
islands  of  the  sea.  It  has  sixteen  hundred  elders  in  the  mis- 
sion field,  laboring  without  pay.  Its  membership  numbers 
about  three  hundred  thousand.  It  has  four  magnificent  tem- 
ples in  which  are  administered  ordinances  for  the  living  and 
the  dead.  It  is  presided  over  by  Lorenzo  Snow,  George  S. 
Cannon  and  Joseph  F.  Smith,  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ, 
holding  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  with  the  bind- 
ing and  loosing  power  which  Christ  conferred  on  Peter, 
James  and  John,  and  which  they  restored  to  earth.  It  has 
twelve  Apostles  to  open  the  door  of  the  kingdom  in  all 
nations,  and  set  in  order  the  affairs  of  the  church.  It  has 
all  the  orders  of  the  Christian  ministry  and  priesthood  which 
were  in  the  church  during  the  first  century  of  the  Christian 
era.  It  administers  the  same  ordinances  and  enjoys  the 
same  unity,  power,  spiritual  gifts  and  divine  communications 
as  were  then  bestowed."'^  Thus  spoke  Elder  Richards,  tell- 
ing the  truth,  too,  so  far  as  his  account  is  concerned  with 
the  progress  of  Mormonism  and  the  surmounting  of  diffi- 
culties, the  growth  and  spread  of  the  sect,  the  zeal  of  its 
representatives,  and  its  spirit  of  propagandism ;  but  mis- 
representing anew  the  relation  of  the  Mormonism  to  Chris- 
tianity. This  Mormon  Church  is  no  more  like  the  Chris- 
tian Church  of  the  first  century  than  that  arch-rebel  who 
was  cast  from  the  heavenly  heights  to  the  infernal  depths, 
is  like  those  pure   spirits  that   kept  their   first   estate   and 


*In  Progress.     Vol.   IIT.      No.    11,   p.   684. 


40  Some    Modern    Isms. 

minister  about  God's  throne  this  hour.  This  church  has 
continued  to  grow  during  the  last  twenty  years. 

The  growth  of  Mormonism  is  probably  to  be  explained: 
1st. — By  its  religious  earnestness.  Some  mormons  are  earn- 
est to  spread  their  tenets  because  of  the  temporal  gain  they 
will  thus  get.  Some  have  been  given  over  to  a  strong  de- 
lusion, to  believe  a  lie,  the  lie  they  teach;  because  they 
wished  to  believe  it  instead  of  God's  truth  and  to  serve 
gods  of  their  own  instead  of  the  true  God.  Some  are  honest 
fanatics,  deceived  and  deceiving.  This  earnestness  is  a 
powerful  factor  in  their  growth. 

2d. — They  are  organized  compactly  and  are  under  the 
direction  of  one  all  powerful  will.  Officers  abound.  Every 
officer  has  absolute  control  over  all  beneath  him.  At  the 
head  stands  the  President,  who  is  the  Prophet,  Revelator  and 
Seer.  Near  him  stand  his  advisers,  who  can  advise  only. 
Next  comes  the  College  of  Apostles;  next  the  seventy.  These 
are  the  general  officers.  Each  district  has  its  subordinate 
organization. 

Everywhere  official  promotion  is  the  certain  result  of 
efficiency  in  office  already  held.  Scores  of  men  are  ap- 
pointed to  go  out  and  serve  as  missionaries,  says  Bishop 
Tuttle,  every  year;  and  they  go  usually  without  purse  or 
scrip,  save  such  as  they  themselves  provide.  There  are  per- 
haps two  thousand  such  missionaries  in  the  field  to-day. 
This  compact  organization  helps  it  to  grow. 

vSrd. — Polygamy  welds  the  Mormons  together  in  a  solid 
unity,  inasmuch  as  it  separates  between  the  Mormons  and 
the  rest  of  the  world;  and  inasmuch  as  having  permeated 
Mormon  society  it  cannot  be  condemned  without  disgrace 
either  in  one's  self  or  kinsfolk.  The  very  women  who  hate 
it,  know  that  its  overthrow  will  affect  tliemselves  and  their 
daughters  with  dishonor. 

Hence,  while  they  published  to  the  world  that  they  had 


Some    Modern    Isms.  41 

ceased  to  contract  polygamous  marriages  since  Utah  was 
made  a  State,  they  still  did  make  them,  if  outside  witnesses 
can  be  trusted.  'The  Missionaries  of  the  Northern  Pres- 
byterian Church,  in  the  year  1898,  found  2,000  polygamous 
marriages  that  had  been  celebrated  since  Statehood  was  con- 
ferred, and  over  1,000  children  bom  of  these  marriages." 
And  these  children  are  having  Mormonism  instilled  into 
them  from  their  earliest  years.  Thus  Mormonism  grows. 
It  claimed  65,000  additions  in  the  year  1898.  The  pro- 
nunciation against  future  polygamy  by  President  Smith  in 
the  Annual  Conference  of  1904,  cannot  be  taken  as  boua 
fide,  except  with  salt. 

This  growing  monster,  for  a  time  fed  chiefly  on  the  peas- 
antry of  Europe,  but  alas!  it  is  now  preying  on  our  own 
land.  Nor  is  it  confining  itself  to  the  more  out  of  the  way 
places  and  the  homes  of  the  illiterate  and  morally  untrained. 
It  has  become  bolder.  It  commands  newspapers  in  promi- 
nent cities.  It  held  a  convention  in  the  later  nineties  in 
Atlanta,  Georgia.  A  leading  newspaper  gave  a  broadside  to 
it,  and  no  condemnation.  The  following  cut  is  reproduced 
from  The  Sun,  Baltimore,  Wednesday  Morning,  February  8, 
1911. 

From  the  Presbyterian  of  the  South,  of  July  18,  1918, 
we  cite: 

"After  openly  defying  and  after  persistently  defending 
his  own  violation  of  the  anti-polygamy  statutes  of  the  Fed- 
eral government  by  marrvdng  three  women  and  after  being 
excluded  from  the  House  of  Representatives,  Brigham  H. 
Roberts,  a  Mormon,  is  now  a  khaki-clad  government  official 
to  serve  as  chaplain  in  our  army." 

These  are  but  instances  of  the  aggressions  of  Mormonism. 
The  people  of  the  country  should  be  aroused  to  the  danger 
of  such. 

If  the  people  were  properly  instructed  in  God's  truth  com- 
paratively few  of  them  could  be  led  off.     But  now  vast  num- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  43 

bers  about  us  are  as  sheep  having  no  shepherd.  They  are 
the  prey  of  wolves.  We  ought  to  teach  God's  truth  and  so 
fill  men's  mind  with  it  as  to  fortify  them  against  such  anti- 
Christian  religions,  and  we  ought  to  expose  Mormonism, 
and  we  ought  to  pray  to  God  to  bring  this  pestiferous  re- 
ligion to  naught,  at  once.  What  are  you  going  to  do 
about  it,  my  brethren?  Carry  this  question  with  you.  A 
part  of  the  responsibility  for  the  future  evil  of  Mormonism 
rests  on  you.     God  help  you  to  meet  it!     Amen. 


44  Some   Modern   Isms. 


Christian  Science 


I  have  endeavored  in  the  following  lectures  to  present  as 
a  preliminary,  Mrs.  Eddy's  definition  of  her  ism,  her  alle- 
gations as  to  its  sources,  characteristics,  and  proofs,  and 
then  to  give  a  systematic  view  of  her  teachings  on  ontology, 
theology,  anthropology,  soteriology,  eschatology,  and  healing. 

I  claim  only  very  imperfect  success,  owing  largely  to  the 
impossibility  of  throwing  into  system  drivellings  so  hetero- 
geneous and  inconsistent  as  Mrs.  Eddy's  are. 

I  crave,  therefore,  the  indulgence  of  the  hearer  as  I  pro- 
ceed, and  particularly  while  I  shall  be  dealing  with  the 
preliminaries  and  with  her  ontology. 


Some   Modern    Isms.  45 


Literature  on  Christian  Science 


1.  Science  and  Health. 

2.  Autobiography. 

3.  Manual  of  the  First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist. 

4.  Miscellaneous  Writings.     (All  the  foregoing  are  by  Mrs 

Eddy.) 

5.  W.  P.  McCorkle:     Christian  Science  a  False  Christ 

6.  Marsten:     The  Mask  of  Christian  Science. 

7.  Bates:     Christian  Science   and  Its  Problems. 

8.  M.  Twain:     Christian  Science. 

9.  Mrs.  Eddy:     Message  to  the  Mother  Church,  June,  1902 


46  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Christian  Science 


Christian  Science  is  the  name  given  by  Mrs.  Mary  Mason 
Baker  Glover  Patterson  Eddy,  to  her  teaching. 

I.  In  the  study  of  her  teaching  we  shall  let  the  authoress 
(1)  define  her  caption  of  it,  (2)  tell  how  she  got  the  matter 
of  it,  (3)  describe  its  character,  (4)  set  forth  her  "tests" 
of  its  truth: 

(1)    Of  the  term  Christian  Science,  she  says: 

"The  terms  Divine  Science,  Spiritual  Science,  Christ 
Science,  or  Christian  Science,  or  Science  alone,  she  (Mrs. 
Eddy),  employs  interchangeably,  according  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  context.  These  synonymous  terms  stand  for 
everything  relating  to  God,  the  infinite,  supreme,  eternal 
mind.  It  may  be  said,  however,  that  the  term  Christian 
Science  relates  especially  to  this  science  as  applied  to  human- 
ity. It  reveals  God  not  as  the  author  of  sin,  sickness  and 
death,  but  as  divine  Principle,  supreme  Being,  Mind,  exempt 
from  all  evil.  It  teaches  that  matter  is  the  falsity,  not  the 
fact,  of  existence;  that  nerves,  brain,  stomach,  lungs,  and 
so  forth,  have — as  matter — no  intelligence,  life  or  sensa- 
tion," (pp.  20-21).* 

She  says,  more  briefly,  "The  term  Christian  Science  was 
introduced  by  the  author  to  designate  the  scientific  system 
of  Metaphysical   healing,"    (p.    17). 

She  says  again,  "The  chief  stones  in  tlie  temples  of  Chris- 
tian Science  are  to  be  found  in  the  following  postulates; 
that  life  is  God,  Good  and  not  evil;  that  Soul  is  sinless  not 
to  be  found  in  body;  that  Spirit  is  not,  and  cannot  be, 
material;  that  life  is  not  subject  to  death;  that  the  real  man 

♦The   reference   to    pasres    in    this    lecture    are    to    the    pages    of    "Science 
and  Health,"   unless  otherwise  specified. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  47 

has  no  consciousness  of  material  life  or  death,"'    (p.   184). 
(2)   As  to  the  origin  of  her  ism  the  authoress  says: 
"The  revelation  consists  of  two  parts: 

1.  The  discovery  of  this  Divine  Science  of  Mind-healing, 
through  a  spiritual  sense  of  the  Scriptures,  and  through  the 
teachings  of  the  Comforter,  as  promised  by  the  Master. 

2.  The  proof,  by  present  demonstration,  that  the  so-called 
miracles  of  Jesus  did  not  specially  belong  to  a  dispensa- 
tion now  ended,  but  that  they  illustrate  an  ever-operative 
divine  Principle.  The  operation  of  this  principle  indicates 
forever  the  Scientific  order  and  continuity   (p.   17). 

"I  therefore  plant  myself  unreservedly  on  the  teachings 
of  Jesus,  of  his  Apostles,  of  the  Prophets,  and  on  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Science  of  mind.  Other  foundations  there  are 
none.  All  other  systems — systems  based  wholly  or  partly 
on  knowledge  gained  through  the  material  senses — are  reeds 
shaken  by  the  wind,  not  houses  built  on  the  rock. 

"The  theories  I  combat  are  these:  (1)  That  all  is 
matter;  (2)  that  matter  originates  in  Mind,  and  is  real  as 
Mind,  possessing  intelligence  and  life.  The  first  theory, 
that  matter  is  everything,  is  quite  as  reasonable  as  the  second, 
that  Mind  and  matter  co-exist  and  co-operate.  One  only 
of  the  following  statements  can  be  true:  (1)  that  everything 
is  matter;    (2)   that  ever}'thing  is  Mind.     Which  one  is  it? 

"Matter  and  mind  are  antagonistic,  and  both  have  not 
place  and  power.  Only  by  understanding  that  there  is  but 
one  power — not  two  powers,  matter  and  mind — are  correct 
and  logical  conclusions  reached"   (pp.   165-166). 

"To  grasp  the  reality  and  order  of  Being  in  its  Science, 
you  must  begin  by  reckoning  God,  Good,  as  the  only  Mind, 
Life,  Substance,  Intelligence"   (p.  171). 

These  quotations  show  that  Mrs.  Eddy  claims  to  get  her 
teachings  "through  a  spiritual  sense  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
through  the  teachings  of  the   Comforter" — claims  to  get  it 


48  Some    Modern    Isms. 

out  of  "the  teachings  of  Jesus,  of  his  Apostles,  of  the  Proph- 
ets" and  out  of  "the  testimony  of  the  Sciences  of  Mind/' 
She  identifies  "the  teachings  of  the  Comforter"  with  "the 
testimony  of  the  Science  of  Mind,"  i.  e.,  with  her  own  in- 
spired teachings.     (See  p.  227). 

What  she  represents  as  "the  spiritual  sense  of  the  Scrip- 
tures" is  arbitrarily  read  by  her  into  the  Scriptures.  They 
contain  no  such  sense  as  she  asserts  that  they  contain.  Read 
her  "Key  to  the  Scriptures,"  pp.  495-590,  made  up  of  com- 
ments on  parts  of  the  first  four  chapters  of  Genesis  and  a 
smaller  portion  of  the  Book  of  Revelation,  and  of  a  "Glos- 
sary," in  which  she  defines  the  senses  in  which  she  claims 
to  use  certain  terms.  The  character  of  her  "exegesis"  is 
fairly  illustrated  by  the  following  examples  which  have  been 
selected  almost  at  random  from  the  "Key,"  wherein  she 
tells  us  that  "each  text  is  followed  by  its  spiritual  interpre- 
tation." 

"Genesis  1:2:  And  the  earth  was  without  form,  and 
void;  and  darkness  was  upon  the  face  of  the  deep,  and  the 
Spirit  of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters." 

"The  divine  Principles  and  idea  constitute  spiritual  har- 
mony— Heaven  and  eternity.  In  this  universe  of  Truth, 
matter  is  unknown.  No  supposition  of  error  enters  there. 
Christian  Science,  the  Word  of  God,  saith  to  the  darkness 
upon  the  face  of  error,  "God  is  All-in-all,"  and  light  ap- 
pears in  proportion  as  this  is  understood.  It  reveals  the 
eternal  wonder — that  infinite  space  is  peopled  with  God's 
ideas,  reflecting  Him  in  countless  spiritual  forms"  (p.  497). 

"Genesis  1:6:  'And  God  said:  Let  there  be  a  firma- 
ment in  the  midst  of  the  waters,  and  let  it  divide  the  waters 
from  the  waters.' 

"Understanding  is  the  spiritual  firmament,  whereby  hu- 
man conception  distinguishes  between  Truth  and  error.  The 
divine  Mind,  not  matter,  creates  all  identities;  and  they  are 


Some    Modern    Isms.  49 

forms  of  thought,  the  ideas  of  Spirit,  present  to  Mind  only, 
never  to  mindless  matter"  (pp.  498-499). 

''Genesis  1:24:  And  God  said:  'Let  the  earth  bring 
forth  the  living  creature  after  his  kind — cattle  and  creep- 
ing thing  and  beast  of  the  earth,  after  his  kind;'  and  it 
was  so." 

"Spirit  diversifies,  classifies,  and  individualizes  all 
thoughts,  which  are  as  eternal  as  the  mind  conceiving  them; 
but  the  intelligence,  existence,  and  continuity  of  each 
thought  remain  in  God  the  divinely  creative  Principle  tliere- 
of"  (pp.  506-507). 

"Genesis  1:25:  And  God  created  the  beast  of  the  earth 
after  his  kind,  and  cattle  after  their  kind,  and  everything 
that  creepeth  on  the  earth  after  his  kind;  and  God  saw 
that  it  was  good." 

"God  inspires  all  forms  of  spiritual  thought.  His 
thoughts  are  spiritual  realities.  Mortal  mind — being  non- 
existent, and  consequently  outside  the  range  of  interminable 
space — could  not,  by  simulating  deific  power,  invent  the 
divine  thoughts,  and  afterwards  recreate  them  on  its  own 
plane;  since  nothing  exists  beyond  the  reach  of  all  inclu- 
sive infinity,  wherein  and  whereof  God  is  the  sole  creator. 
He  dwells  in  the  realm  of  Mind,  joyous  in  strength.  His 
infinite  ideas  run  and  disport  themselves.  In  humility  they 
climb  the  heights  of  holiness.     *     *     * 

"Patience  is  symbolized  by  the  tireless  worm,  creeping 
slowly  over  lofty  summits,  persevering  always  in  its  intent. 
The  serpent  of  God's  creating  is  neither  subtle  nor  poisonous, 
but  a  wise  idea,  charming  in  its  adroitness;  for  love  has  no 
elements  of  evil  or  poison  to  impart.  Its  ideas  are  subject 
to  the  mind  which  formed  them"   (pp.  507-508). 

On  these  interpretations  I  remark: 

The  sagest  and  the  simplest  should  see  that  the  Mother 
of   Christian   Science  put   into  the   first  chapter  of  Genesis 


50  Some    Modern    Isms. 

these  vaporings.  That  chapter,  in  the  first  twenty-five  verses, 
gives  a  sublime  account  of  the  order  of  the  creation  of  the 
material  world.  But  Mrs.  Eddy,  as  has  already  cropped 
out,  teaches  that  there  is  no  material  world.  Hence  she  has 
deliberately  set  to  work  to  break  the  force  of  the  narrative 
in  Genesis  I,  by  injecting  teachings  directly  contradictory 
to  its  real  contents.  In  doing  so,  she  betrays  both  conscious 
imposture  and  insane  egotism.  She  must  have  known,  if 
she  had  common  sense,  that  Genesis  I  taught  the  reality  of 
matter  and  its  creation,  and  not  the  vaporings  which  she  pro- 
claims; must  have  been  guilty  of  conscious  imposture.  At 
the  same  time  only  insane  egotism  could  have  moved  her 
to  attempt  this  eisgesis  for  exegesis. 

She  is  guilty  of  the  same  sort  of  doddering  in  dealing 
with  Genesis  2.     Take,  for  example, 

''Genesis,  2:6:  But  there  went  up  a  mist  from  the  earth, 
and  watered  the  whole  face  of  the  ground." 

The  following  is  her  spiritual  comment  on  this  passage: 

"The  Science  and  Truth  of  the  divine  creation  have  been 
presented  in  the  verses  already  considered;  and  now  the 
opposite  error,  a  material  view  of  creation,  is  to  be  set 
forth.  The  second  chapter  of  Genesis  contains  a  state- 
ment of  this  material  view  of  God  and  the  universe,  which 
is  the  exact  opposite  of  Scientific  Truth.  The  history  of 
error,  or  matter,  if  veritable,  would  set  aside  the  omnipotence 
of  Spirit;  but  it  is  the  false  history,  in  contradistinction 
to  the  true. 

"The  Science  of  the  first  record  proves  the  incorrectness 
of  the  second,  for  they  are  antagonistic.  The  first  record 
assigns  all  might  and  government  to  God,  and  endows  man 
out  of  His  perfection  and  power.  The  second  record  chroni- 
cles man  as  mutable  and  mortal — as  having  broken  away 
from  deity,  and  as  revolving  in  an  orbit  of  his  own.  Exist- 
ence, separate  from  Divinity,  Science  regards  as  impossible. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  51 

"This  second  record  unmistakably  gives  the  history  of 
error  in  its  externalized  forms,  called  life  and  intelligence 
in  matter.  It  records  Pantheism,  as  opposed  to  the  supremacy 
of  divine  Spirit." 

The  hearer  has  already  noted  how  this  old  dame  miscon- 
ceives, or  at  the  least,  misstates  the  orthodox  teaching  which 
she  opposes.  She  is  not  more  unfair  in  characterizing  the 
orthodox  view  of  the  universe  as  Pantheistic  in  the  com- 
ment than  her  general  treatment  of  orthodoxy. 

"Genesis  2:7:  And  the  Lord  God  (Jehovah)  formed 
man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nos- 
trils the  breath  of  life,  and  man  became  a  living  soul." 

"Did  the  divine  and  infinite  principle  become  a  finite 
deity,  that  He  should  now  be  called  Jehovah?  Mind  has 
man  made  both  male  and  female,  with  a  single  command- 
How  then  can  a  material  organization  become  the  basis 
of  man?  How  can  the  non-existent  become  the  medium  of 
mind,  and  error  be  the  enunciator  of  Truth?  Matter  is 
not  the  reflection  of  Spirit,  yet  God  is  reflected  in  all  His 
creation.  Is  this  addition  to  his  creation  real  or  unreal? 
Is  it  the  truth,  or  is  it  a  lie,  concerning  man  and  God?" 

"It  must  be  the  latter,  for  God  presently  curses  the 
ground.  Could  Spirit  evolve  its  opposite,  matter — and  give 
matter  ability  to  sin  and  suffer?  Is  Spirit,  God,  injected 
into  dust,  and  eventually  ejected  at  the  demand  of  matter? 
Does  Spirit  enter  dust,  and  lose  therein  the  divine  nature 
and  omnipotence?  Does  mind,  God,  enter  matter,  to  become 
there  a  mortal  sinner,  animated  by  the  breath  of  God?  (pp. 
517-518). 

"Genesis  3  :16  :  Unto  the  woman  he  said:  I  will  multiply 
thy  sorrow^  and  thy  conception;  in  sorrow  shalt  thou  bring 
forth  thy  children  and  thy  desire  shall  be  to  thy  husband, 
and  he  shall  rule  over  thee." 

"Divine  Science  deals  its  chief  blow  at  the  supposed  Wci 


52  Some    Modern    Isms. 

terial  foundations  of  life  and  intelligence.  It  dooms  idola- 
try. A  belief  in  other  gods,  other  creatures,  and  other  crea- 
tions, must  go  down  before  Christian  Science.  It  unveils 
the  results  of  sin,  as  shown  in  sickness  and  death.  When 
will  man  pass  through  the  open  gate  of  Christian  Science, 
into  the  Heaven  of  Soul,  the  heritage  of  the  first  born  among 
men?     Truth  is  indeed  the  way"  (p.  527). 

If  old  Mother  Eddy  can  get  these  vaporings  out  of  these 
verses,  or,  on  an  occasion  of  reading  them,  she  could  as 
easily  get  them  every  one  out  of  "Mary  had  a  little  lamb." 
She  says,  indeed:  "The  Divine  Science  taught  in  the  origi- 
nal language  of  the  Bible  came  through  inspiration,  and 
needs  inspiration  to  be  understood,  p.  215.  That  is,  she 
would  close  the  mouths  of  her  followers  when  they  are 
tempted  to  recalcitrate  against  the  imposture  of  her  "in- 
terpretations," by  the  claim  that  she  speaks  the  mind  of 
God.  But  the  claim  of  inspiration  on  her  part  is  insuffi- 
cient, God  could  not  stultify  himself  by  teaching  that  in  the 
sublime  account  of  the  creation  of  the  material  universe  be 
meant  to  teach  that  no  such  thing  as  matter  exists.  If  the 
Scriptures  yield  Christian  Science,  only  as  she  interprets 
them,  it  is  plain  that  they  are  not  a  source  of  it  at  all. 
Only  an  impostor  and  a  cheat  could  pretend  that  they  teach 
any  such  stuff  as  she  teaches.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they 
contradict  every  distinctive  feature  of  Christian  Science. 

Her  dodderings  about  Gen.  2:7  show  that  she  hates  tlie 
Bible  and  especially  those  parts  more  plainly  against  such 
dodderings. 

Another  pretended  source  is  the  "teachings  of  the  Com- 
forter," "the  testimony  of  the  Science  of  Tvlind,"  her  own 
"understanding  of  mind."  Her  own  understanding  of  mind 
is  claimed  to  be  source  of  all  in  lier  teaching  which  is  not 
found  in  the  Scriptures. 

But  it  has  been  charged  and  ably  maintained,  that  she  de- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  53 

rived  the  essential  points  of  her  theory  of  mental  healing 
and  even  the  term  "Christian  Science,"  from  Dr.  Phineas 
P.  Quimby,  of  Portland,  Maine.  The  charge  seems  to  be 
proven  by  conclusive  testimony.  See  the  Arena  for  May, 
1899,  also  W.  P.  McCorkle,  Christian  Science,  a  False  Christ, 
pp.  43-45. 

It  is  charged  and  made  equally  probable  that  she  borrowed 
the  theosophical  and  Pantheistical  element  which  her  teach- 
ing contains,  as  will  be  shown,  notwithstanding  her  denials, 
from  Oriental  and  ancient  Gnostic  sources;  that  her  teach- 
ing in  this  sphere  is  singularly  like  Madam  Blavatsky's,  in 
regard  both  to  matter  and  phraseology;  that  their  definitions 
of  God,  their  doctrines  of  creation,  and  of  man,  their  doc- 
trines of  grace,  and  of  the  future  life,  their  discounts  of  the 
material  senses,  are  all  singularly  alike;  that  in  all  these 
particulars  they  have  adopted  the  doctrinal  system  of  the 
ancient  Gnostics.     Says  Dr.  Wm.  P.  McCorkle: 

"Mrs.  Eddy  teaches  them,  if  anything,  more  definitely 
than  does  Madame  Blavatsky;  but  the  latter  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  claim  kinship  with  Gnostics  in  general  and  with 
Simon  Magus  in  particular,  identifying  her  system  with 
theirs."  Christian  Science,  a  False  Christ,  p.  265.  See 
also  "An  Old  Enemy  With  Two  New  Faces,"  in  the  Pres- 
byterian Quarterly,  April,  1899. 

It  is  pretty  clear  that  her  understanding  of  the  divine 
Mind  is  only  through  Oriental  Pantheists  and  ancient 
Gnostics. 

She  contends  that  her  cures  are  the  sufficient  proof  of  the 
correctness  of  her  teachings;  but  a  thoughtful  man  can  see 
in  her  cures  no  greater  proofs  of  the  correctness  of  her  teach- 
ings than  that  Francis  Schlatter  spoke  by  inspiration  be- 
cause many  praised  him  for  having  released  them  from  the 
thraldom  of  disease,  or  than  that  the  Negro  woman  in  New 
York,   who   worked   wonders   with   "grease   taken   from   the 


54  Some    Modern    Isms. 

tail  of  a  black  cat  that  had  died  with  its  throat  cut,"  was 
inspired  to  teach  men  the  way  of  life.  Her  well-attested 
cures  were  such  as  have  been  wrought  over  and  over  again 
by  people  who  believed  and  taught  the  contradictiories  of 
her  theories. 

(3)  She  describes  the  character  of  her  teaching  further 
by  declaring:  "In  Christian  Science  are  no  discords,  or 
contradictions,  because  its  logic  is  as  harmonious  as  the 
reasoning  of  an  accurately  stated  syllogism,  or  a  properly 
computed  sum  in  arithmetic,"  (p.  22).  She  describes  it 
further  (in  which  perhaps  her  lust  for  gain  speaks  out),  as 
follows : 

"x\  Christian  Scientist  requires  my  work  on  Science  and 
Health  for  his  text-book,  and  so  do  all  his  students  and 
patients.  Why?  First,  because  it  is  the  voice  of  Truth  to 
this  age,  and  contains  the  whole  of  Christian  Science,  or 
the  Science  of  healing  through  Mind.  Second,  because  it 
was  the  first  published  book  containing  a  statement  of  Chris- 
tian Science,  gave  the  first  rules  for  demonstrating  this 
Science,  and  registered  this  revealed  Truth,  uncontaminated 
with  human  hypotheses.  Other  works  which  have  borrowed 
from  this  book  without  giving  it  credit,  have  adulterated 
the  Science.  Third,  because  this  work  has  done  more  for 
teacher  and  student,  for  healer  and  patients,  than  has  been 
accomplished  by  other  works"   (p.  453). 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  distinctive  teachings  of 
her  book  appear  to  have  been  stolen  from  Quimby,  from 
Oriental  theosophists  and  ancient  Gnostics;  and  that  she 
endeavored  to  support  these  teachings  by  imposed  "spiritual 
senses"  on  certain  Scriptures,  notwithstanding  the  patent 
fact  that  these  ver>'  Scriptures  cut  the  ground  from  beneath 
her  teaching. 

As  to  the  logical  character  of  her  teaching,  it  would  be 
hard,  in  all  the  range  of  literature,  to  find  more  inconse- 


Some   Modern    Isms.  55 

quent  writing,  and  more  numerous  fallacies  considering  the 
size  of  her  book,  than  are  to  be  found  in  "Science  and 
Health."  Take  this  as  a  fair  instance  of  the  logical  char- 
acter of  her  writing: 

"Mind  creates  its  own  likeness  in  ideas,  and  the  sub- 
stance of  an  idea  is  very  far  from  being  the  supposed  sub- 
stance of  non-intelligent  matter.  Hence  the  Father  of  INIind 
is  not  the  Father  of  Matter,"  p.  153;  or  again, 

"The  mortality  of  Matter  establishes  the  conclusion  that 
matter  never  originates,  never  did  originate,  in  the  immortal 
*  ^  ^  Matter  is  therefore  not  created  by  Mind,  or  for 
the  manifestations  and  support  of  mind"  (p.  175). 

This  prophetess  is  often  guilty  of  the  fallacy  known  as 
the  logical  quadruped.  That  Mrs.  Eddy  is  not  only  guilty 
of  formal  fallacies  but  reasons  from  false  premises  as  well, 
will  appear  still  more  clearly  as  we  proceed. 

(4)  She  talks  much  of  the  tests,  or  proof,  of  Faith,  i.  e., 
of  Christian  Science.  She  says,  "These  proofs  consist  solely 
in  the  destruction  of  sin,  sickness,  and  death,  by  the  power 
of  the  Spirit,  as  Jesus  destroyed  them,"  pp.  128-129;  "The 
proof  that  the  system  herein  stated  is  Christianly  Scientific 
resides  in  the  good  it  accomplishes;  for  it  cures  on  a  demon- 
strable principle  which  all  may  understand,"  pp.  538-539. 
She  apparently  sets  forth  another  criterion  of  Truth,  on  p. 
22,  "If  you  wish  to  know  the  spiritual  fact,  you  can  discover 
it  by  reversing  the  material  testimony,  be  it  pro  or  con — be 
it  in  accord  with  your  preconceptions,  or  utterly  contrary 
thereto." 

Mark  Twain  well  says  of  the  book,  Science  and  Health: 
"Without  ever  presenting  anything  which  may  rightfully 
be  called  by  the  strong  name  of  Evidence,  and  sometimes 
without  even  mentioning  a  reason  for  a  deduction  at  all,  it 
thunders  out  the  startling  words:  "I  have  proved"  so  and 
so.     It  takes  the  Pope  and  all  the  great  guns  of  his  Church 


56  Some   Modern   Isms. 

in  battery  assembled  to  authoritatively  settle  and  establish 
the  meaning  of  a  sole  and  single  unclarified  passage  of 
Scriptures,  and  this  at  vast  cost  of  time  and  study  and 
reflection,  but  the  author  of  this  work  is  superior  to  all 
that.  She  finds  the  whole  Bible  in  an  unclarified  condi- 
tion, and  at  small  expense  of  time  and  no  expense  of  mental 
effort  she  clarifies  it  from  lid  to  lid,  recognizes  and  improves 
the  meanings,  then  authoritatively  settles  and  establishes 
them  with  formulas  which  you  cannot  tell  from  "Let  there 
be  light!"  "Here  you  have  it."  It  is  the  first  time  since 
the  dawn-days  of  Creation  that  a  Voice  has  gone  crashing 
through  space  with  such  placid  and  complacent  confidence 
and  command."  Mark  Twain,  Christian  Science,  pp.  30-32. 
We  have  seen  that  her  cures  are  no  sign  that  she  speaks 
the  truth;  and  it  will  require  more  than  her  ipse  dixit  to  do 
away  with  the  validity  of  the  testimony  of  our  senses,  since 
we  must  trust  them,  to  receive  her  teaching,  through  written 
or  spoken  word. 

II.  In  the  further  study  of  her  teaching  let  us  consider 
her  "Ontology,"  or  ''Metaphysics." 

She  says:  "Ontology  receives  less  attention  than  physi- 
ology. Why?  Because  mortal  mind  must  waken  to  spiritual 
life,  before  it  cares  to  solve  the  problem  of  Being,"  p.  548. 
"Ontology  is  defined  as  'the  science  of  the  necessary  con- 
stituents and  relations  of  all  beings,'  and  it  underlies  ail 
metaphysical  practice.  Our  system  of  Mind-healing  rests 
on  the  apprehension  of  the  nature  and  essence  of  all  Be- 
ing— on  mind  and  its  essential  qualities,"  p.  456.  ''Meta- 
physics is  above  physics  and  matter  does  not  enter  into 
metaphysical  premises  or  conclusions.  Its  categories  rest 
on  one  basis,  namely,  the  divine  Mind.  T^Ietaphysics  re- 
solves things  into  thoughts,  and  exchanges  the  objects  of 
sense  for  the  ideas  of  soul.      .      .      .        Matter  and  Mind 


Some    Modern    Isms.  57 

are  antagonistic,  and  both  have  not  place  or  power.  Only 
by  understanding  that  there  is  but  one  power— not  two 
powers,  matter  and  Mind — are  correct  and  logical  conclu- 
sions reached"  pp.  165-166.  "All  forms  of  error  support 
the  false  conclusions  that  there  is  more  than  one  life;  that 
material  history  is  as  real  and  living  as  spiritual  history; 
that  mortal  error  is  as  conclusively  mental  as  immortal 
Truth;  and  that  there  are  two  separate,  antagonistic  entities 
and  beings;  two  powers — namely,  Spirit  and  matter — result- 
ing in  a  third  person  (mortal  man),  who  carries  out  the 
delusions  of  sin,  sickness  and  death."  "Such  theories  are 
evidently  erroneous,"  p.  100.  "All  real  Being  is  in  the 
divine  Mind  and  idea;"  a  "false  sense  evolves,  in  belief,  a 
subjective  state  of  mortal  mind,  which  this  same  mind  calls 
matter.  .  .  .  Mind  is  all,  and  matter  is  naught.  .  .  . 
the  only  realities  are  the  divine  Mind  and  Idea,"  which  idea 
she  holds  to  be  man,  p.  23. 

The  heart  of  her  ontological  teaching  comes  out  in  her 
doctrine  of  God.  She  says,  "The  starting-point  of  Science 
is  that  God,  Spirit  is  supreme,  and  that  there  is  no  other 
might  or  Mind — that  God  is  love,  and  therefore  He  is  divine 
Principle"  (p.  171).  "God  is  supreme  Being,  the  only 
life,  substance,  and  soul,  the  only  Intelligence  of  the  uni- 
verse, including  man"  (p.  225).  "God  is  what  the  Scrip- 
tures declare  Him  to  be — Life,  Truth,  Love.  God  is  Spirit 
and  Spirit  is  divine  Principle.  Principle  is  divine  Mind, 
and  Mind  is  not  both  good  and  bad,  for  God  is  mind; 
therefore  Mind  is  God  only,  and  there  is  but  one  mind,  be- 
cause there  is  but  one  God,"  (p.  226).  "Man  was  and  is 
God's  idea,  even  the  infinite  expression  of  the  infinite  Mind, 
and  coexistent  and  coeternal  with  that  Mind.  Man  has  been 
forever  in  the  eternal  Mind,  God;  but  infinite  mind  can 
never  be  in  man,  though  made  manifest  through  him.  Man's 
consciousness  and  individualitv  are  reflections  of  God.    Thev 


58  Some   Modern    Isms. 

are  emanations  of  Him  who  is  Life,  Truth,  Love.  Idea 
was  and  is  never  material,  but  always  spiritual  and  eternal" 
(p.  231).  "God  and  man,  Principle  and  idea,  are  insep- 
arable, harmonious  and  eternal"  (p.  232).  "All  is  infinite 
Mind  and  its  infinite  manifestation,  for  God  is  All-in-all. 
Spirit  is  immortal  truth;  matter  is  mortal  error.  Spirit  is 
the  real  and  eternal;  matter  is  the  unreal  and  temporal. 
Spirit  is  God,  and  man  is  his  image  and  likeness;  hence 
man  is  spiritual  and  not  material.  .  .  .  "The  spiritual 
universe,  including  man,  is  a  compound  yet  individual  idea, 
reflecting  the  divine  Substance  of  Spirit  (p.  464).  "God 
is  the  Principle  of  man  and  man  is  the  idea  of  God"  (p. 
472).  "Soul  (God)  is  the  Substance,  Life  and  Intelligence 
of  man.  .  .  .  Man  is  the  expression  of  God,  Soul. 
Separated  from  man,  who  expresses  Soul,  Spirit 
would  be  a  non-entity.  Man  divorced  from  Spirit,  would 
lose  his  entity;  but  there  is,  there  can  be,  no  such  division, 
for  man  is  so-existent  with  God,  and  God  is  Spirit  (p.  473). 

Remark : 

1st.  These  quotations  show  that  she  held  an  idealism 
like  Berkeley's,  in  that  she  denied  the  existence  of  matter, 
but  unlike  Berkeley's  in  that  while  he  affirmed  that  mate- 
rial nature,  in  its  ultimate  analysis,  is  but  a  conscious  ex- 
perience— produced  in  the  creature  by  the  activity  of  God, 
she  held  that  material  nature  is  the  creature  of  "Mortal 
Mind,"  which  itself  is  an  unreality  as  truly  as  its  creation. 

2d.  These  quotations  also  show,  notwithstanding  her  dis- 
claimers, that  she  was  a  Pantheist.  They  teach  over  and 
over  again  that  God  is  the  only  mind — the  only  life,  sub- 
stance, soul.  They  teach  that  God  is  the  substance,  life,  in- 
telligence, Principle  of  man. 

These  and  scores  of  other  passages  leave  one  in  doubt  as 
to  whether  God  Himself  was  in  her  view  more  than  Thought 
— as  to  whether  she  did  not  resolve  God  Himself  into  idea. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  59 

Certainly  she  seems  often  to  make  no  distinction  'oetween 
substance  and  attribute,  but  to  identify  every  attribute  with 
every  other,  and  each  with  substance.  She  avows  at  times 
that  she  resolves  things  into  thoughts.  Compare  what  she 
calls  a  definition  of  God,  on  p.  9.  "God=Principle,  Life, 
Truth,  Love,  Soul,  Spirit,  Mind."  She  is  not  always  con- 
sistent, but  speaks  sometimes  as  if  she  held  to  absolute 
Pantheistic  Idealism. 

These  quotations  show  that  creation  by  God  was  turned 
into  emanation  from  God,  by  her,  another  ear-mark  of  the 
Pantheist.     (See  pp.  50  and  51  of  this  lecture). 

They  teach  that,  separated  from  man,  God  would  be  a 
non-entity;  that  He  and  man,  His  universe,  are  necessarily 
co-eternal. 

These  quotations  show  that  God  had  no  personality  in 
Mrs.  Eddy's  conception;  that  he  was  only  Truth,  Love,  In- 
telligence, Spirit,  Principle.  She  more  clearly  teaches  tlie 
same  view,  when  she  declares,  that  God  is  identical  with 
nature.  .  .  .  that  God  is  natural  Good  (p.  13);  when 
she  stigmatizes  the  orthodox  idea  of  God  as  personal,  as 
''anthropomorphism,  or  humanization  of  Deity"  (p.  510); 
and  when  she  contrasts  "interpreting  God  as  a  corporeal 
Savior"  (a  misrepresentation  of  the  orthodox  view),  and  as 
"the  saving  Principle"  (p.  181). 

She  betrays  her  Pantheism  in  another  way: 

In  addition  to  that  which  has  been  incidentally  brought 
out  as  to  her  views  of  man's  being,  she  teaches:  "Man  is 
neither  young  nor  old.  He  has  neither  birth  nor  death. 
He  is  not  a  beast,  a  vegetable,  or  a  migratory  mind.  He 
does  not  pass  from  the  mortal  to  the  immortal,  from  evil  to 
good,  or  from  good  to  evil"  (p.  140).  "When  God  ex- 
pressed in  man  the  infinite  idea,  forever  developing  itself, 
broadening  and  rising  higher  and  higher  from  a  boundless 
basis,   He   created   everything   that   is   to   be   found    in   the 


60  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Kingdom  of  Mind.  We  know  no  more  of  man's  individual- 
ity, as  the  true  divine  image  and  likeness,  than  we  know  of 
God's"  (p.  154).  Men  "represents  the  sum  of  all  substance 
or  infinite  Mind"  (p.  155).  "Rightly  understood,  instead 
of  possessing  a  sentient  material  form,  man  has  a  sensation- 
less  body,  and  God,  the  Soul  of  man  and  of  existence,  is 
perpetual  in  His  own  individuality,  harmony  and  immor- 
tality, thus  perpetuating  these  qualities  in  man"  (p.  176). 
"Man  is  spiritual.  He  is  not  God,  Spirit.  If  man  were 
Spirit,  then  men  would  be  spirits,  gods"  (p.  259).  "God  is 
the  principle  of  Man;  and  the  Principle  of  man  rendering 
perfect  its  idea,  or  reflection — man — remains  perfect.  Man 
is  the  expression  of  God's  being.  If  there  was  ever  a  mo- 
ment when  man  expressed  not  this  perfection,  he  could  not 
have  expressed  God;  and  there  would  have  been  a  time 
when  Deity  was  without  entity.  Being.  If  man  has  lost 
perfection,  he  has  lost  his  Principle,  or  Mind.  If  man  ever 
existed  without  Principle,  or  Mind,  then  his  existence  was 
a  myth"  (p.  466).  "Man  is  the  idea  of  divine  Principle, 
not  physique.  He  is  the  compound  idea  of  God,  including 
all  right  ideas;  the  generic  term  for  all  that  reflects  God's 
image  and  likeness;  the  conscious  identity  of  Being,  as  found 
in  Science,  where  man  is  the  reflection  of  God  or  Mind,  and 
therefore  is  eternal;  that  which  has  no  separate  mind  from 
God;  that  which  has  not  a  single  quality  underived  from 
Deity;  that  which  possesses  no  life,  intelligence,  or  creative 
power  of  his  own,  but  reflects  all  that  belongs  to  his  Maker. 
Man  is  incapable  of  sin,  sickness  and  death,  inas- 
much as  he  derives  his  essence  from  God,  and  possesses  not 
a  single  original,  or  underived  power"  (p.  471).  "Man  is 
the  infinite  idea  of  infinite  Spirit"   (p.  582). 

From  these  and  scores  of  similar  passages,  it  is  clear,  again, 
that  Mrs.  Eddy  is  a  Pantheist.  If  she  represents  in  one 
breath,  man  as  God's  eternal  idea,  not  God  Himself,  in  the 


Some    Modern    Isms.  61 

next  she  teaches  that  man  has  no  separate  mind  from  God; 
that  man's  intelligence  is  God's  intelligence;  that  in  man 
resides  the  "conscious  identity  of  being,"  that  is,  that  the 
only  consciousness  which  God  has  of  His  own  identity  is 
the  consciousness  which  man  has.  True  she  sometimes  con- 
tradicts herself  roundly,  as  when  she  says:  "God  is  the 
Only  Life,  and  Life  is  no  more  in  the  forms  which  express 
it  than  substance  is  in  the  shadow"  (p.  226);  or  when  she 
says  again?  "Man  reflects  and  expresses  the  divine  Sub- 
stance or  Mind;  but  God  is  not  in  his  reflection  any  more 
than  man  is  in  the  mirror  which  reflects  his  image,"  (pp. 
196-197).  She  even  tells  us  why  she  denies  the  immanence 
of  God  in  man:  that,  "if  He  dwelt  within  what  He  creates, 
God  would  not  be  reflected,  but  absorbed,"  and  so  forth  (p. 
226).  She  contradicts  herself  but  what  are  contradictions 
to  this  prophetess?  Her  insane  egotism  makes  her  regard- 
less of  the  eternal  laws  of  thought.  She  speaks  and  expects 
human  sheep  to  bleat  an  amen. 

3d.  From  the  passages  quoted,  and  more  like  them,  she 
teaches  the  impersonality  of  man:  "He  is  the  infinite  idea 
of  the  infinite  God."  U  a  person  at  all,  since  he  is  an 
infinite  idea,  he  would  be  an  infinite  person,  and  God  being 
infinite,  we  would  have  two  infinite  persons.  But  we  have 
already  seen  that  Mrs.  Eddy  rejects  the  notion  of  person- 
ality as  applied  to  God  as  anthropomorphic.  Of  man  she  is 
willing  to  predicate  a  sort  of  individuality  but  no  personality. 

From  this  point  of  view  it  is  hard  to  understand  her 
fear  of  anthropomorphism,  should  she  predicate  the  per- 
sonality of  God.     Man  she  denies  to  be  personal. 

She  teaches  that  man  was  never  created,  never  fell,  never 
recovered  to  communion  with  God,  is  eternal,  sinless,  per- 
fect, non-personal,  unaccountable.  In  making  each  of  these 
predications,  she  would  force  us  to  deny  the  teachings  of 
Scripture,   uninspired   history,   personal   experience,   or  con- 


62  So:me    Modern    Isms. 

sciousness,  and  sometimes  all  of  them.  Thus  she  asserts 
man's  sinlessness,  which  is  contradicted  by  the  teachings 
of  Scripture,  histor)-,  consciousness  and  conscience. 

4th.    (Passing  now  to  her  ontology  of  the  unreal) : 

"On  these  questions  of  ontology,  Mortal  mind  hath  wrought 
vast  confusion,  "according  to  Mrs.  Eddy.  She  tells  us: 
"The  term  mortal  mind  is  a  solecism  in  language;  and  in- 
volves an  improper  use  of  the  word  mind.  As  mind  is  im- 
mortal, the  phrase  mortal  mind  implies  something  untrue 
and  therefore  unreal;  and  as  the  phrase  is  used  in  teaching 
Christian  Science,  it  is  meant  to  designate  something  which 
has  no  real  existence''  (p.  8) :  "Mortal  mind  and  body  are 
one.  Neither  exists  without  the  other.  .  .  .  Mortal 
matter,  or  body,  is  but  a  false  concept  of  mortal  mind.  It 
(mortal  mind)  builds  its  own  superstructure,  of  which  the 
material  body  is  the  grosser  and  more  basal  portion;  but 
from  first  to  last  this  body  is  only  a  material  and  sensuous 
belief"  (p.  70).  "The  fading  forms  of  matter,  the  mortal 
body  and  earth  are  the  fleeting  thoughts  of  the  human  mind" 
(p.  160). 

Truly  mortal  mind  is  a  strange  sort  of  tiling — identical 
with  body,  which  is  its  own  false  concept,  self-evolving,  hav- 
ing in  the  body  its  grosser  and  more  basal  portion,  this  body 
being  only  a  material  and  sensuous  belief! 

This  unreal  thing — unlike  anything,  I  freely  grant,  in 
the  whole  realm  of  substantive,  or  factual  existence — is  re- 
sponsible, according  to  the  much  married  prophetess  for  a 
vast  number  of  things  which  people  of  common-sense  regard 
as  realities,  which  she  considers  as  utter  unrealities. 

She  makes  mortal  mind  responsible  for  Adam  and  every- 
thing which  has  sprung  from  him.  Hear  some  of  her  sage 
statements:  "The  word  Adam  is  from  the  Hebrew  Adamah, 
signifying  the  red  color  of  the  ground,  dust,  nothingnesis. 
Divide  the  name  Adam  into  two  syllables,  and  it  reads  a 


Some    Modern    Isms.  63 

dam,  or  obstruction.  This  suggests  the  thought  of  some- 
thing fluid,  of  mortal  mind  in  solution,  of  the  darkness  which 
seemed  to  appear,  when  'darkness  was  upon  the  face  of  the 
deep,'  and  matter  stood  as  opposed  to  Spirit,  as  that  which 
is  accursed;  and  from  this  earth,  or  matter,  sprang  Adam" 
(p.  233).  "Adam,  the  synonym  for  error,  stands  for  a  be- 
lief of  material  mind.  He  begins  his  reign  over  man  some- 
what mildly,  but  increases  in  falsehood  as  his  days  become 
shorter'   (p.  522). 

5th.  Not  only  does  mortal,  or  material  mind  produce  mat- 
ter and  Adam,  Mrs.  Eddy  claims  that  it  has  been  "Scienti- 
fically established  that  leprosy  was  a  creation  of  mortal 
mind"  (p.  217),  that  "if  the  lungs  are  disappearing,  this 
is  but  one  of  the  beliefs  of  mortal  mind;"  that  "mortal  man 
will  be  less  mortal  when  he  learns  that  the  lungs  never  sus- 
tained existence,  and  can  never  destroy  God  who  is  our 
Life"  (p.  423).  "From  human  belief  comes  the  reproduc- 
tion of  the  species.  .  .  .  This  embryotic  and  material- 
istic belief  in  turn  fills  itself  with  thoughts  of  pain  and 
pleasure,  of  life  and  death,  and  arranges  itself  into  five 
senses,  which  presently  measure  belief  by  the  size  of  a  brain, 
called  mind,  and  the  bulk  of  a  body  called  matter.''  "Human 
birth,  growth  and  decay  are  as  the  grass  springing  from 
the  soil,  with  beautiful  green  blades — afterwards  to  wither 
and  to  return  to  its  native  nothingness.  This  mortal  seem- 
ing is  temporal,  and  never  emerges  into  immortal  being"  (p. 
....).  It  makes  us  believe  that  we  are  "fatigued"  (p.  113), 
or  that  we  are  sinful. 

Some  of  these  vaporings  would  seem  to  come  of  her 
premises.  She  holds  that  God  is  all,  that  God  is  good,  that 
God  is  Spirit  and  life,  that  God  is  unchangeable.  Hence,  for 
her,  there  can  be  no  real  weariness,  sickness,  or  sin,  and  no 
body  or  matter;  but  her  premises  are  wrong  and  her  inferences 
untrust worth}-  and  contradictory  to  the  views  of  God  (as  ex- 


64  Some    Modern    Isms. 

pressed  in  His  word)  and  of  man.  Her  teachings  on  on- 
tology are  a  dump-heap  of  worthless  and  conflicting  imagin- 
ings. 

III.  Her  substitutes  for  the  doctrines  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures. 

We  shall  group  these  under  the  heads:  1st,  Theological 
(in  the  narrow  sense);  2d,  Anthropological;  3d,  Soteriologi- 
cal;  4th,  Ecclesiological ;  5th,  Eschatological. 

1st.  Theological: 

(1)  We  have  already  seen  that  she  teaches  Pantheism.  She 
says  further,  on  page  8,  of  Rudiments  and  Rules,  "I  prefer 
to  retain  a  proper  sense  of  deity  by  using  the  phrase  an 
individual  God,  rather  than  a  personal  God."  She  seemed 
unable  to  conceive  of  personality  except  as  united  to  body, 
which  she  regarded  as  an  illusion. 

(2)  She  says  of  the  Trinity:  "The  theory  of  three  per- 
sons in  one  God  (that  is  a  personal  Trinity,  or  Triunity), 
suggests  heathen  Gods,  rather  than  the  one  ever-present  I 
Am"  (p.  152).  "Life,  Truth  and  Love  constitute  the  triune 
God,  or  triply  divine  Principle.  They  represent  a  trinity 
in  unity;  three  in  one — the  same  in  essence,  though  multi- 
form in  office:  God  the  Father;  Christ  the  type  of  Sonship; 
Divine  Science,  or  the  Holy  Comforter"  (p.  227). 

When  it  is  shown,  as  will  be  done  a  little  later,  that  Christ 
was,  in  her  view,  an  emanation  similar  to  your  self,  as  she  sees 
things,  but  recognizing  better  its  character;  and  when  you 
remember  that  the  Divine  Science,  which  is  Christian  Science, 
is  the  Holy  Ghost,  you  will,  of  course,  see  that  the  Christian 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  has  been  swept  away. 

(3)  Mrs.  Eddy  lucubrates  about  what  she  calls  creation. 
She  says,  e.  g.,  "Mind  creates  its  own  likeness  in  ideas,  and 
the  substance  of  an  idea  is  very  far  from  being  the  supposed 
substance  of  non-intelligent  matter.  Hence  the  Father  of 
Mind  is  not  the  Father  of  matter.     The  material  .senses  and 


Some    Modern    Is:Nrs.  65 

human  conceptions  would  translate  spiritual  ideas  into  ma- 
terial beliefs,  and  say  that  an  anthropomorphic  god,  instead 
of  infinite  Principles,  is  the  Fatlier  of  the  brain"  (p.  155). 
"Is  Spirit  the  source,  or  creator,  of  matter?  Science  reveals 
nothing  in  Spirit  out  of  which  to  create  matter.  Science  re- 
pudiates matter  (p.  174).  She  does  not  seem  to  have  caught 
the  conception  of  de  nihilo  creation.  In  this  passage  she 
talks  as  if  creation  were  a  mere  making.  So,  again,  she 
says:  "Does  God  create  man,  who  is  called  material,  out 
of  Himself,  Spirit?  .  .  .  Can  evil  be  derived  from 
good?  (p.  302).  She  betrays  her  Pantheism,  showing  that 
her  notion  of  creation  is  that  of  the  Pantheists,  in  passages 
not  a  few,  e.  g.,  in  this:  "According  to  Christian  Science, 
the  true  senses  of  man  are  spiritual,  emanating  from  the 
divine  mind"   (p.   180). 

(4)  As  for  Providence,  she  has  no  place  for  it  and,  in- 
deed, denies  that  there  are  special  providences  (pp.  648  and 
13).  She  is  consistent  here.  The  Pantheist  can  know  no 
providence.  He  says:  "God  goes  on  eternally,  necessarily, 
but  God  is  all." 

How  different  is  this  theology  proper  from  that  of  the 
Christian   Scriptures : 

"God  is  a  spirit,  infinite,  eternal  and  unchangeable,  in  his 
being,  wisdom,  power,  holiness,  justice,  goodness  and  truth." 

"There  are  three  persons  in  the  Godhead,  the  Father,  the 
Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  these  three  are  one  God,  the 
same  in  substance,  equal  in  power  and  glory." 

"God's  work  of  creation  is  his  making  all  things  of  noth- 
ing by  the  word  of  his  power,  in  the  space  of  six  days,  and 
all  very  good." 

"God's  works  of  providence  are  his  most  holy,  wise,  and 
powerful,  preserving  and  governing  all  his  creatures  and  all 
their  actions." 

It  is  convenient  to  notice  her  treatment  of  angels  and 
demons,  at  this  point. 


66  Some    Modern    Isms. 

She  says:  "Angels  are  God's  impartations  to  man — not 
messengers,  or  persons,  but  messages  of  the  true  idea  of 
divinity,  flowing  into  humanity"  (p.  195).  "Jacob  was 
alone,  wresting  with  error  .  .  .  when  an  angel,  a  mes- 
sage from  Truth  and  Love,  appeared  to  him,  and  smote  the 
sinew,  or  strength  of  his  error,  till  it  was  powerless''  (p.  204). 

According  to  her,  the  devil  is  "personified  evil"  (p.  302). 
She  defines  "Devil"  as  "Evil,"  a  lie,  error;  neither  corpo- 
reality nor  mind;  the  opposite  of  truth;  a  belief  in  sin, 
sickness  and  death;  animal  magnetism;  the  lust  of  the  flesh, 
which  saith:  "I  am  life  and  intelligence  in  matter.  There 
is  more  than  one  mind,  for  I  am  mind — a  wicked  mind,  self- 
made  or  created  by  Jehovah,  and  put  into  the  opposite  of 
mind  termed  matter,  thence  to  reproduce  a  mortal  universe, 
including  man,  not  after  the  image  and  likeness  of  Spirit, 
but  after  my  own  image"  (p.  575). 

According  to  the  Scriptures,  Angels  are  pure  spiritual  per- 
sonal beings,  and  the  Devil,  is  one  who  was  such  a  being, 
but  who  plunged  into  sin. 

2d.  Anthropological,  or  the  doctrines  concerning  man 
when  first  created,  concerning  his  fall,  concerning  man  as 
a  sinner. 

(1)  We  have  clearly  seen  that,  according  to  Mrs.  Eddy, 
man  is  not  a  creation  of  a  different  substance,  or  substances, 
from  God,  but  an  eternal  emanation  from  God,  His  infinite 
idea,  or  reflection;  that  man  is  not  to  be  described  as  per- 
sonal, we  being  no  more  able  to  see  what  constitutes  per- 
sonality in  his  case  than  in  God's;  that  he  is  as  unchange- 
able as  God;  that  he  cannot  be  a  sinner,  since  God  cannot 
sin  and  God  is  the  substance  of  man. 

(2)  We  have  already  seen,  that  according  to  her  evil- 
spiritual,  or  physical — is  an  illusion,  a  non-entity.  But  hear 
her  further: 

"Since  God  is  x\ll,  there  is  no  room  for  his  opposite.     He 


Some    Modern    Isms.  67 

alone  created  the  real,  and  it  is  good;  therefore  evil,  being 
the  opposite  of  goodness  is  unreal"  (p.  234).  "Evil  has 
no  reality.  It  is  neither  person,  place,  nor  thing,  but  is 
simply  a  belief,  an  illusion  of  material  sense"   (p.  237). 

Contrast  with  this  Scriptural  Anthropology: 

"God  created  man  after  his  own  image,  in  knowledge, 
righteousness  and  holiness,  with  dominion  over  the  crea- 
tures." 

"Man  being  left  to  the  freedom  of  his  own  will,  fell 
from  the  estate  wherein  he  was  created  into  an  estate  of  sin 
and  misery  by  sinning  against  God." 

"Sin  is  any  want  of  conformity  unto  or  transgression  of 
the  law  of  God." 

"The  sinfulness  of  that  estate  whereunto  man  fell  con- 
sists in  the  guilt  of  Adam's  first  sin,  the  want  of  original 
righteousness,  and  the  corruption  of  his  whole  nature,  which 
is  commonly  called  original  sin,  together  with  all  actual 
transgressions  which  do  proceed  from  it." 

"All  mankind  by  their  fall  lost  communion  with  God, 
are  under  his  wrath  and  curse,  and  so  made  liable  to  all 
the  miseries  of  this  life,  to  death  itself  and  to  the  pains  of 
hell  forever." 

"God  having  out  of  his  mere  good  pleasure,  from  all 
eternity,  elected  some  to  everlasting  life,  did  enter  into  a 
covenant  of  grace  to  deliver  them  out  of  the  estate  of  sin 
and  misery  and  to  bring  them  into  an  estate  of  salvation 
by  a  Redeemer." 

3d.  Ethical  Doctrines. 

Mrs.  Eddy's  ethical  doctrines  may  be  summed  up  in  the 
maxim:  Gather  dollars  for  the  Christian  Science  Monopoly 
— for  Mrs.  Eddy  and  her  glory.  Mark  twain  puts  the 
motto  of  Christian  Science  as  follows:  "Do  anything  and 
everything  your  hand  may  find  to  do;  and  charge  cash  for 
it;    and   collect   the   monev    for    it    in    advance    (Christian 


68  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Science,  p.  79),  He  might  have  added  to  this  motto:  In 
gathering  the  cash,  despise  all  laws  of  God  or  man,  as 
far  as  is  compatible  with  safety. 

She  contributed  nothing  to  the  relief  of  the  poor,  nor 
taught  her  disciples  to  do  so.     Says  Mark  Twain: 

"No  charities  to  support.  No,  nor  even  to  contribute  to. 
One  searches  in  vain  the  Trust's  advertisements  and  the 
utterances  of  its  organs  for  any  suggestion  that  it  spends 
a  penny  on  orphans,  wadows,  discharged  prisoners,  hospitals, 
ragged  schools,  night  missions,  city  missions,  libraries,  old 
peoples-  homes,  or  any  other  object  that  appeals  to  a  human 
being's  purse  through  his  heart. 

'T  have  hunted,  hunted  and  hunted,  by  correspondence 
and  otherwise,  and  have  not  yet  got  upon  the  track  of  a 
farthing  that  the  Trust  has  spent  upon  any  worthy  ob- 
ject. Nothing  makes  a  Scientist  so  uncomfortable  as  to 
ask  him  if  he  knows  of  a  case  where  Christian  Science  has 
spent  money  on  a  benevolence,  either  among  its  own  adher- 
ents or  elsewhere.  He  is  obliged  to  say  "No."  And  then 
one  discovers  that  the  person  questioned  has  been  asked  the 
question  many  times  before,  and  that  it  is  getting  to  be  a 
sore  subject  wdth  him.  Why  a  sore  subject?  Because  he 
has  written  his  chiefs  and  asked  with  high  confidence  for 
an  answer  that  will  confound  these  questioners — and  the 
chiefs  did  not  reply.  He  has  written  again,  and  then 
again — not  with  confidence,  but  humbh',  now — and  has 
begged  for  defensive  ammunition  in  the  voice  of  supplica- 
tion. A  reply  does  at  last  come — to  this  effect:  'We 
must  have  faith  in  our  Mother,  and  rest  content  in  the 
conviction  that  whatever  She  does  with  the  money  it  is  in 
accordance  with  orders  from  Heaven,  for  She  does  no  act 
of  any  kind  without  first  'demonstrating  over'  it." 

"That  settles  it — as  far  as  the  disciple  is  concerned.     Hi^ 
i^iind  is  satisfied  with  that  answer;  he  gets  down  his  Annex 


Some    Modern    Isms.  69 

and  does  an  incantation  or  two,  and  that  mesmerizes  liis 
spirit  and  puts  that  to  sleep — brings  it  peace.  Peace  and 
comfort  and  joy,  until  some  inquirer  punctures  the  old  sore 
again. 

"Through  friends  in  America,  I  asked  some  questions, 
and  in  some  cases  got  definite  and  mfomiing  answers;  in 
other  cases  the  answers  were  not  definite  and  not  valuable. 
To  the  question,  'Does  any  of  the  money  go  to  charities?' 
the  answer  from  an  authoritative  source  was  :  'No,  not  in 
the  sense  usually  conveyed  by  this  word.'  (The  italics  are 
mine).  That  answer  is  cautious.  But  definite,  I  think — 
utterly  and  unassailably  definite — although  quite  Christian- 
Scientifically  foggy  in  its  phrasing.  Christian  Science  testi- 
mony is  generally  foggy;  generally  diffuse,  generally  garrul- 
ous. The  writer  was  aware  that  the  first  word  in  his  phrase 
answered  the  question  which  I  was  asking,  but  he  could  not 
help  adding  nine  dark  words.  Meaningless  ones,  unless  ex- 
plained by  him.  It  is  quite  likely,  as  intimated  by  him,  that 
Christian  Science  has  invented  a  new  class  of  objects  to 
apply  the  word  "charity"  to,  but  without  an  explanation  we 
cannot  know  what  they  are.  We  quite  easily  and  naturally 
and  confidently  guess  that  they  are  in  all  cases  objects  which 
will  return  five  hundred  per  cent,  on  the  Trust's  investment 
in  them,  but  guessing  is  not  knowledge;  it  is  merely,  in 
this  case,  a  sort  of  nine-tenths  certainty  deducible  from 
what  we  think  we  know  of  the  Trust's  trade  principles,  and 
its  sly  and  furtive  and  shifty  ways"  (Christian  Science,  pp. 
75-78). 

4th.  Soteriological  doctrines,  or  her  doctrines  of  Salvation. 

(1)  Mrs.  Eddy  gives  to  Jesus  Christ  small  place  in  man's 
salvation.  She  could  not  openly  displace  him  absolutely 
without  handicapping  herself  in  the  endeavor  to  win  nomi- 
nal Christians  to  her  false  and  anti-Christian  ism.  She 
needed  them  in  order  to  get  their  verv  material  dollars. 


70  Some   Modern   Isms. 

She  teaches  that  in  Christ  Jesus  there  were  two  elements. 
Hear  her:  "Jesus  was  the  highest  human  concept  of  a  per- 
fect man.  He  was  inseparable  from  Christ,  the  Messiah — 
the  divine  idea  of  God — outside  the  flesh.  This  also  ena- 
bled him  to  demonstrate,  above  all  other  men,  his  control 
over  matter.  .  .  .  Angels  announced  to  the  wise  men 
of  old  this  dual  appearing,  and  they  whisper  it,  through  faith 
to  the  hungering  heart  in  every  age"  (p.  478).  "The  Christ 
element  in  the  Messiah  made  him  the  way,  the  Truth,  and 
Life  (p.  184);  "That  saying  of  our  Master,  T  and  my 
Father  are  one,  'separated  them  from  the  scholastic  theology 
of  the  Rabbis.  ...  He  knew  of  but  one  Mind,  and 
laid  no  claim  to  any  other"  (p.  210).  "Jesus  was  born 
of  Mary,  Christ  was  born  of  God.  Jesus  was  a  mediator 
between  humanity  and  Spirit"  (p.  227).  "The  divine  idea, 
or  Christ,  was,  and  is,  and  ever  will  be  inseparable  from  its 
divine  Principle,  God"  (p.  229).  "Christ  is  the  idea  of 
Truth,  and  this  idea  comes  to  heal  sickness  and  sin,  through 
Christian  Science,  which  denies  corporeal  power.  Jesus  is 
the  name  of  the  man  who  has  presented,  more  than  all 
other  men,  this  idea  of  God,  for  he  came  healing  the  sick 
and  the  sinful,  and  destroying  power  of  death"    (p.   469). 

As  to  the  errors  in  this  basket  of  trash :  I  shall  deal  with 
only  one  of  them.  She  abuses  John  10:30,  "I  and  the 
Father  are  one"  to  try  to  get  out  of  it  support  for  the  cro- 
chet that  there  is  but  one  mind.  These  words  of  Christ 
are  full  of  meaning:  "It  is  I,  not  the  Son,  the  Father,  not 
my  Father;  one  essence  (Hen,  Vulg.  Unum) ;  not  one  person 
(Heis,  Gal.  3:28,  unus);  are  not  am."  Christ  is  here  re- 
vealed of  the  substance  of  the  Godhead.  But  the  passage 
does  not  at  all  teach  that  there  is  only  one  mind  or  soul, 
which  is  God,  in  all  men.  The  context  makes  it  plain  that 
the  thought  was  quite  otherwise.  The  Jews  were  just  then 
giving  evidence  of  their  unbelief  and  hostility. 


Some   Modern    Isms.  71 

Mrs.  Eddy  almost  always  keeps  far  away  from  Scripture. 
She  was  evidently  much  more  afraid  of  it  than  of  the  Devil, 
evil  or  anything  for  which  the  Devil  stands,  in  her  voca- 
bulary.    But  whenever  she  touches  it,  she  muddies  it. 

(2)  His  work  was  that  of  the  "Way-shower,"  according 
to  Mrs.  Eddy's  teaching,  that  of  a  Mrs.  Eddy  before  Mrs. 
Eddy's  time,  less  perfect  than  she,  as  he  labored  under  the 
"illusion"  that  he  had  a  body  and  that  there  were  such 
realities  as  sin  and  death.  He  made  an  atonement  between 
man  and  God,  in  that  he  "taught  and  demonstrated"  man's 
oneness  with  the  Father — "Man's  unity  with  God,  whereby 
he  reflects  divine  Truth,  Life  and  Love" — in  that  he  showed 
that  man  is  not,  and  cannot  be  a  sinner,  since  God  is  his 
substance,  and  he  God's  eternal  idea.  She  teaches  that  his 
atonement  destroys  belief  in  matter  (pp.  324,  325);  destroys 
selfishness  (p.  326),  destroys  sin,  sickness  and  death  (p. 
3.24),  shows  mortals  how  to  do  their  work  (p.  323) ;  but  she 
denied  that  he  suffered  vicariously;  "Final  deliverance  from 
error — whereby  we  rejoice  in  immortality,  boundless  free- 
dom, and  sinless  sense — is  neither  reached  through  paths  of 
flowers,  nor  by  pinning  one's  faith  to  vicarious  effort.  Who- 
soever believeth  that  wrath  is  righteous,  or  that  divinity  is 
appeased  by  human  suffering,  does  not  understand  God"  (p. 
327).  "That  God's  wrath  should  be  vented  on  his  beloved 
Son  is  divinely  unnatural.  Such  a  theory  is  man-made. 
The  atonement  is  a  hard  problem  in  theology;  but  its  more 
reasonable  explanation  is,  that  suffering  is  an  error  of  sinful 
sense,  which  Truth  destroys,  and  that  eventually  both  sin 
and  suffering  will  fall  at  the  feet  of  everlasting  love"  (p. 
328). 

This  is  another  basket  of  trash:  That  "Christ  was  less 
perfect  than  Mrs.  Eddy;  that  he  made  atonement  only  "by 
teaching  and  demonstrating  man's  oneness  with  the  Father, 
showing  that  man  cannot  be  a  sinner  since  God  is  his  sub- 


72  Some    Modern    Isms. 

stance;  that  he  did  not  suffer  vicariously  for  men;  that  God's 
wrath  could  never  have  been  poured  out  on  his  Son,  or  on 
man;  that  suffering  is  no  reality. 

It  deserves  nothing  but  a  puff  of  contempt.  It  is  sup- 
ported solely  by  Mrs.  Eddy's  assertions. 

(3)  She  teaches  accordingly  that  "with  God  there  is  no 
such  thing  as  pardon.  Divine  love  destroys  death.  Truth 
destroys  error,  and  Love  destroys  hate.  Being  destroyed,  sin 
needs  no  other  form  of  forgiveness"  (p.  234).  "Sin  is  for- 
given only  as  it  is  destroyed  by  Christ — Truth,  Love."  .  .  . 
"The  divine  Love  corrects  and  governs  man.  Men  may 
pardon,  but  this  divine  Principle  alone  reforms  the  sinner. 
God  is  not  separate  from  the  wisdom  He  bestows.  The 
talents  he  gives  we  must  improve.  Calling  on  him  to  for- 
give our  work  badly  done  or  left  undone,  implies  the  vain 
supposition  that  we  have  nothing  to  do  but  to  ask  pardon, 
and  that  afterwards  we  shall  be  free  to  repeat  the  offence" 
(p.  311).  "To  reach  Heaven,  the  Harmony  of  Being,  we 
must  understand  the  divine  Principle  of  being"    (p.   311), 

This  shuts  everybody  out  of  heaven. 

(4)  Salvation,  she  teaches,  is  to  be  sought  through  re- 
form and  good  works.  Thus  she  says:  "By  interpreting 
God  as  a  corporeal  Savior"  (she  means  personal  Savior), 
"but  not  as  the  saving  Principle,  we  shall  continue  to  seek 
salvation  through  pardon,  and  not  through  reform,  and  re- 
sort to  matter,  instead  of  Spirit,  for  the  cure  of  the  sick" 
(p.  181).  "We  must  work  out  our  own  salvation"  (pp. 
651  and  424). 

She  must  be  classed  roughly  with  Pelagians  on  this  point. 

(5)  The  great  saving  instrumentality  is  not  faith,  ac- 
cording to  Mrs.  Eddy,  but  understanding.  She  says: 
"Faith  advanced  to  spiritual  understanding,  is  the  evidence 
gained  from  Spirit,  which  rebukes  material  beliefs,  and 
establishes  the  claims  of  God. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  73 

"In  Hebrew,  Greek,  Latin  and  English,  faith  and  the 
words  corresponding  thereto,  have  these  two  definitions, 
trustfulness  and  trustworthiness.  One  kind  of  faith  trusts 
our  welfare  to  another  being.  The  other  kind  of  faith  un- 
derstands how  to  work  out  one's  own  'salvation,  with  fear 
and  trembling.'  'Lord,  I  believe,  help,  thou,  my  unbelief  I' 
expresses  the  helplessness  of  a  blind  faith;  whereas  the  in- 
junction, 'Believe  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,'  demands  self- 
reliant  trustworthiness  which  includes  the  understanding  and 
confides  all  to  God. 

"The  Hebrew  verb  to  believe  means  also  to  be  P.rm  or  to 
be  constant.  This  certainly  applies  to  Truth  and  Love,  un- 
derstood and  practiced.  Firmness  in  error  will  never  save 
from  sin,  disease  and  death." 

"Acquaintance  with  the  original  texts,  and  willingness  to 
give  up  human  beliefs  (established  by  hierarchies  and  insti- 
gated sometimes  by  the  worst  passions  of  men),  open  the 
way  for  Christian  Science  to  be  understood  and  make  the 
Bible  the  chart  of  Life,  to  mark  healing  currents  and  buoys 
of  Truth"  (pp.  328-329).  "Spirit  understands,  and  thus 
precludes  the  need  of  believing.  .  .  .  The  believer  and 
belief  are  one,  and  are  mortal  mind.  .  .  .  The  under- 
standing that  Life  is  God  lengthens  our  days  by  strength- 
ening our  trust  in  the  deathless  reality  of  life,  its  Almighty- 
ness  and  immortality"   (p.  483). 

Thus  we  have  a  false  gnosis  put  in  the  place  of  faith  of 
mind  and  heart  and  will. 

(6)  She  makes  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  we  have  seen,  Divine 
Science  (p.  579). 

(7)  It  has  become  abundantly  clear  that  that  which  man 
is  to  be  saved  from  is  his  illusions  of  sin,  sickness  and 
death.  He  is  to  learn  that  there  are  no  realities  correspond- 
ing to  these  terms. 

Contrast  the  Biblical  soteriology: 


74  Some    Modern    Isms. 

"The  only  Redeemer  of  God's  elect  is  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  being  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  became  man  and 
so  was  and  continued  to  be  God  and  man  in  two  distinct 
natures  and  one  person  forever."  "Christ  executeth  the 
office  of  a  prophet  in  revealing  to  us,  by  his  word  and 
spirit,  the  will  of  God  for  our  salvation."  "Christ  execut- 
eth the  office  of  a  Priest  in  his  once  offering  up  of  him- 
self, a  sacrifice  to  satisfy  divine  justice  and  reconcile  us  to 
God,  and  in  making  continued  intercession  for  us.  Christ 
executeth  the  office  of  a  King  in  subduing  us  unto  himself 
in  ruling  and  defending  us,  and  in  restraining  and  con- 
quering all  his  and  our  enemies."  Him  "God  hath  set 
forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood,  to 
declare  his  righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are 
past,  through  the  forbearance  of  God."  "By  grace  are  ye 
saved  through  faith  and  that  not  of  yourselves;  it  is  the 
gift  of  God;  not  of  works  lest  any  man  should  boast." 

"Faith  in  Jesus  Christ  is  a  saving  grace  whereby  we  re- 
ceive and  rest  on  Christ  for  salvation  as  he  is  offered  to  us 
in  the  Gospel." 

"Effectual  calling  is  the  work  of  God's  Spirit,  whereby 
convincing  us  of  our  sin  and  misery,  enlightening  our  minds 
in  the  knowledge  of  Christ  and  renewing  our  wills,  he  doth 
persuade  and  enable  us  to  embrace  Jesus  Christ  freely  of- 
fered to  us  in  the  Gospel." 
5th.  Ecclesiological  doctrines. 

(1)  Mrs.  Eddy  defines  the  Church  as  "the  structure  of 
Truth  and  Love;  whatever  rests  upon  and  proceeds  from 
divine  Principle."  "The  Church  is  that  institution  which 
affords  proof  of  its  utility,  and  is  found  elevating  the  race, 
rousing  the  dormant  understanding  from  material  beliefs,  to 
the  apprehension  of  spiritual  ideas  and  the  demonstration 
of  Divine  Science,  thereby  casting  out  devils,  or  error,  and 
healing  the  sick"  (p.  574). 


Some    Modern    Isms.  75 

''Jesus  Christ  purposed  founding  his  society,  not  on  the 
personal  Peter,  as  a  mortal  man,  but  on  the  God  power  which 
lay  behind  his  confession  of  the  Messiah"  (p.  31). 

(2)  Mrs.  Eddy  established  an  absolutely  autocratic  gov- 
ernment in  her  Church.     (Cf.  M.  Twain.  Ibid.,  p.  167). 

(a)  She  herself  assumed  the  humble-proud  title  of  Pastor- 
emeritus;  but  she  kept  all  power  in  her  own  hands. 

(b)  Science  and  Health  was  made  Universal  Pastor  of 
the  Supreme  Church  in  Boston,  and  in  all  Branch  Churches. 
The  term  of  that  pastorate  to  be  forever. 

(c)  She  provided  for  two  Readers  in  every  Christian 
Science  pulpit,  a  man  and  a  woman.  She  allows  no  talk- 
ers, no  preachers  in  any  pulpit — readers  only.  Readers  of 
her  books  and  the  portions  of  the  Scriptures  which  she  has 
adapted,  no  others  may  be  heard.  She  allowed  no  commen- 
tators to  print  or  write  without  her  supervision. 

(d)  She  formed  the  order  of  worship — for  all  Christian 
Science  Churches — determined  its  readings,  hymns,  thinking 
substitute  for  prayers,  and  Sacred  Breakfast.  She  permits 
no  changes. 

(e)  She  wrote  its  creed  and  allows  no  other. 

Mrs.  Eddy  was  the  whole  power  in  the  Church  while  she 
lived.  (See  Manual  of  the  First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist). 
True,  she  had  Boards  of  Directors,  Boards  of  Education, 
Boards  of  Finance,  etc.  But  no  member  could  be  elected 
without  her  approval.  No  member  could  hold  his  seat  for 
one  minute  longer  than  she  pleased.  Every  member  was  a 
puppet  through  whom  she  indicated  her  will.  Mark  Twain 
says: 

"Mrs.  Eddy  is  the  sovereign;  she  devised  that  great  place 
for  herself,  she  occupies  that  throne. 

"In  1895,  she  wrote  a  little  primer,  a  little  body  of  auto- 
cratic laws,  called  the  Manual  of  the  First  Church  of  Christ, 
Scientist,  and  put  those  laws  in  force,  in  permanence.     Her 


76  Some    Modern    Isms. 

government  is  all  there;  all  in  that  deceptively  innocent- 
looking  little  book,  that  cunning  little  devilish  book,  that 
slumbering  little  brown  volcano,  with  hell  in  its  bowels.  In 
that  book  she  has  planned  out  her  system,  and  classified  and 
defined  its  purpose  and  powers. 

"Main  Parts  of  the  Machine. 

"A  Supreme  Church.     At  Boston. 

"Branch  Churches.     All  over  the  world. 

"One  pastor  for  the  whole  of  them;  to-wit,  her  book. 
Science  and  Health.  Term  of  the  book's  office — forever. 

"In  every  C.  S.  pulpit,  two  'Readers,'  a  man  and  a  woman. 
No  talkers,  no  preachers,  in  any  Church — readers  only. 
Readers  of  the  Bible  and  her  books — no  others.  No  com- 
mentators allowed  to  write  or  print. 

"A  Church  Service.  She  has  framed  it — for  all  the  C  S. 
Churches — selected  its  readings,  its  prayers,  and  the  h}Tnns 
to  be  used,  and  has  appointed  the  order  of  procedure.  No 
changes  permitted. 

"A  Creed.  She  wrote  it.  All  C.  S.  Churches  must  sub- 
scribe to  it.    No  other  permitted. 

"A  Treasury.     At  Boston.     She  carried  the  key. 

"A  C.  S.  Book-Publishing  House.  For  books  approved 
by  her.     No  others  permitted. 

"Journals  and  Magazines.  These  are  organs  of  hers,  and 
are  controlled  by  her. 

"A  College.     For  teaching  C.  S. 

"Distribution  of  the  Machine's  Powers  and  Dignities. 

"Supreme   Church. 

"Pastor  Emeritus — Mrs.  Eddy. 

"Board  of  Directors. 

"Board  of  Education. 

"Board    of    Finance. 

"College  Faculty. 

"Various  Committees. 


Some    ^Modern    Isms.  77 

"Treasurer. 

*'Clerk. 

"First  Members  (of  the  Supreme  Church). 

"Members  of  the  Supreme  Church. 

"It  looks  fair,  it  looks  real,  but  it  is  all  a  fiction. 

"Even  the  title  'Pastor  Emeritus'  is  a  fiction.  Instead  of 
being  merely  an  honorary  and  ornamental  official,  Mrs. 
Eddy  is  the  only  official  in  the  entire  body  that  has  the 
slightest  power.  In  her  Manual,  she  has  provided  a  prodi- 
gality of  ways  and  forms  whereby  she  can  rid  herself  of 
any  functionary  in  the  government  whenever  she  wants  to. 
The  officials  are  all  shadows,  save  herself;  she  is  the  only 
reality.  She  allows  no  one  to  hold  office  more  than  a  year — 
no  one  gets  a  chance  to  become  over-popular  or  over-useful, 
and  dangerous.  "Excommunication"  is  the  favorite  pen- 
alty— it  is  threatened  at  every  turn.  It  is  evidently  the  pet 
dread  and  terror  of  the  Church's  membership. 

"The  member  who  thinks,  without  getting  his  thought 
from  Mrs.  Eddy  before  uttering  it,  is  banished  permanent- 
ly. One  or  two  kinds  of  sinners  can  plead  their  way  back 
into  the  fold,  but  this  one,  never.  To  think — in  the  Supreme 
Church — is  the  New  Unpardonable  Sin. 

"To  nearly  every  severe  and  fierce  rule,  Mrs.  Eddy  adds 
this  rivet:  'This  by-law  shall  not  be  changed  without  the 
consent  of  the  Pastor  Emeritus. 

"Mrs.  Eddy  is  the  entire  Supreme  Church,  in  her  own 
person,  in  the  matter  of  powers  and  authorities. 

"Although  she  has  provided  so  many  ways  of  getting  rid 
of  unsatisfactory  members  and  officials,  she  was  still  afraid 
she  might  have  left  a  life-preserver  lying  around  somewhere, 
therefore  she  devised  a  rule  to  cover  that  defect.  By  ap- 
plying it,  she  can  excommunicate  (and  this  is  perpetual 
again),  every  functionary  connected  with  the  Supreme 
Church,  and  every  one  of  the  twenty-five  thousand  members 


78  Some    Modern    Isms. 

of  that  Church,  at  an  hour's  notice — and  do  it  all  by  her- 
self without  anybody's  help. 

"By  authority  of  this  astonishing  by-law,  she  has  only  to 
say  a  person  connected  with  that  Church  is  secretly  prac- 
tising hypnotism  or  mesmerism;  whereupon,  immediate  ex- 
communication without  a  hearing,  is  his  portion!  She  does 
not  have  to  order  a  trial  and  produce  evidence — her  accusa- 
tion is  all  that  is  necessary. 

"Where  is  the  Pope?  and  where  the  Czar?  As  the  ballad 
says: 

'Ask  of  the  winds  that  far  away 
With  fragments  strewed  the  sea!' 

"The  Branch  Church's  pulpit  is  occupied  by  two  'Read- 
ers.' Without  them  the  Branch  Church  is  as  dead  as  if 
its  throat  had  been  cut.  To  have  control,  then,  of  the  Read- 
ers, is  to  have  control  of  the  Branch  Churches.  Mrs.  Eddy 
has  that  control — a  control  wholly  without  limit,  a  control 
shared  with  no  one. 

"1.  No  Reader  can  be  appointed  to  any  Church  in  the 
Christian  Science  world  without  her  express  approval. 

"2.  She  can  summarily  expel  from  his  or  her  place  any 
Reader,  at  home  or  abroad,  by  a  mere  letter  of  dismissal, 
over  her  signature,  and  without  furnishing  any  reason  for 
it,  to  either  the  congregation  or  the  Reader. 

"Thus  she  has  an  absolute  control  over  all  Branch 
Churches  as  she  has  over  the  Supreme  Church.  This  power 
exceeds  the  Pope's. 

"In  simple  truth,  she  is  the  only  absolute  sovereign  in 
all  Christendom.  The  authority  of  the  other  sovereigns  has 
limits,  hers  has  none.  None  whatever.  And  her  yoke  does 
not  fret,  does  not  offend.  Many  of  the  subjects  of  the  other 
monarchs  feel  their  yoke,  and  are  restive  under  it;  tlieir 
loyalty  is  insincere.  It  is  not  so  with  this  one's  human 
property;  their  loyalty  is  genuine,  earnest,  sincere,  enthusi- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  79 

\  astic.  The  sentiment  which  they  feel  for  her  is  one  which 
goes  out  in  sheer  perfection  to  no  other  occupant  of  a 
throne;  for  it  is  love,  pure  from  doubt,  env}-,  exaction,  fault- 
seeking,  a  love  whose  sun  has  no  spot — that  form  of  love, 
strong,  great,  compassable  by  no  word  but  one,  the  prodigious 
word.  Worship.  And  it  is  not  as  a  human  being  that  her 
subjects  worship  her,  but  as  a  supernatural  one,  a  divine 
one,  one  who  has  comradeship  with  God,  and  speaks  by 
His  voice. 

"Mrs.  Eddy  has  herself  created  all  these  personal  grand- 
eurs and  autocracies — with  others  which  I  have  not  (in  this 
article)  mentioned.  They  place  her  upon  an  Alpine  soli- 
tude and  supremacy  of  power  and  spectacular  show  not 
hitherto  attained  by  any  other  self-seeking  enslaver  disguised 
in  the  Christian  name,  and  they  persuade  me  that,  although 
she  may  regard  "self-deification  as  blasphemous,"  she  is  as 
fond  of  it  as  I  am  of  pie."  (Christian  Science,  pp.  343-349), 
Since  her  death  her  power  of  government  is  vested  in  the 
Board  of  Directors  of  the  First  Church,  Scientist,  Boston. 

(3)  As  to  the  rites  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper: 
fa)  She  does  not  acknowledge  the  propriety  of  baptism  with 
water  (matter).  She  defines  baptism  as  "Purification  by  the 
Spirit"  (Christian  Science),  "submergence  in  Truth."  (b) 
The  Lord's  Supper  (she  declares  is  not  needed)  (p.  339). 
But  she  has  instituted  a  breakfast  "to  commemorate  Christ's 
ascension  above  matter"  (p.  340). 

(4)  For  worship  she  has  read  portions  of  Science  and 
Health  and  portions  of  the  Scriptures  selected  and  adapted 
by  herself;  and  substitutes  a  thinking  exercise  for  prayer. 
This  exercise  of  the  understanding  may  be  illustrated  by  her 
version  of  the  "Lord's  Prayer,"  which  is  as  follows : 

"Our  Father  and  Mother  God,  all  harmonious. 

"Adorable  One. 

"Ever  just  and  omnipotent. 


80  Some    Modern    Isms. 

"Thy  supremacy  appears  as  matter  disappears. 

"Thou  fillest  our  famished  affections 

"And  love  is  reflected  in  love 

"And  leadest  us  not  in  temptation,  but  preservest  us  from 
sin,  sickness  and  death; 

"For  thou  art  all  Substance,  Life,  Truth  and  Love  for- 
ever.    So  be  it."    Science  and  Health,  Edition  1886. 

She  has  no  use  for  prayer,  can't  abide  it.  Listen  to  these 
words : 

"God  is  love.  Can  we  ask  Him  to  be  more?  God  is  in- 
telligence. Can  we  inform  the  Infinite  Mind  or  tell  him 
anything  he  does  not  comprehend?  Do  we  hope  to  change 
perfection?  Shall  we  plead  for  more  at  the  open  fount, 
which  always  pours  forth  more  than  we  receive?  Does 
spoken  prayer  bring  us  nearer  the  source  of  all  existence  and 
blessedness?"  (p.  3.08). 

Her  definition  of  the  Church  makes  it  a  different  insti- 
tution from  that  founded  in  the  family  of  Abraham,  cradled 
in  the  wilderness,  developed  under  David,  reformed  at  Penta- 
cost  and  spread  over  all  continents  through  much  tribulation 
and  toil  as  the  ages  have  passed. 

Her  scheme  of  government  is  antipodal  to  the  spiritual 
republic  enjoined  in  God's  word. 

The  simple  rites  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  were 
to  be,  by  the  authority  of  Jesus,  administered  throughout 
this  world  age  till  he  should  come  again. 

Prayer,  including  petition,  supplication,  and  intercession, 
were  enjoined  by  Apostles,  and  by  Christ  himself  as  of  per- 
petual obligation. 

6th.  Eschatological  doctrines: 

1.  She  teaches  of  death  that  it  is  a  mere  illusion:  Thus 
she  says:  "The  fact  that  Christ,  or  Faith,  overcame  death, 
proves  the  King  of  terrors  to  be  but  a  mortal  belief,  or  error, 
which  Truth  destroys  with  the  spiritual  evidences  of  Life; 


Some   Modern    Isms.  81 

and  this  shows  that  what  appears  to  the  senses  to  be  death 
is  but  a  mortal  illusion;  for  to  the  real  man  and  the  real 
universe  there  is  no  death  process." 

"The  belief  that  matter  has  life  results,  by  the  universal 
law  of  mortal  mind,  in  a  belief  in  death.  So  man,  tree  and 
flower  are  supposed  to  die;  but  the  fact  remains,  that  God's 
universe  is  spiritual  and  immortal."     . 

"Matter  and  death  are  mortal  illusions"  (p.  185).  "Death 
will  be  found  at  length  to  be  a  mortal  dream,  which  comes 
in  darkness  and  disappears  with  the  light"  (p.  347).  "Man 
is  immortal,  and  the  body  cannot  die,  because  it  has  no  life 
to  surrender.  The  illusions  named  death,  disease,  sickness 
and  sin  are  all  that  can  be  destroyed"  (p.  424). 

This  illusion  seems  to  have  caught  up  Mrs.  Eddy  her- 
self and  whisked  her  away.  Every  Christian  Scientist  prac- 
tically gives  the  lie  to  the  doctrine,  though  he  profess  it  with 
lip:  when  death  comes  and  breaks  up  the  castle  of  the 
soul  of  a  friend,  the  Christian  Scientist  believes  that  there 
has  been  a  real  dissolution  of  a  real  body,  and  shows  it  by 
his  acts.     He  lays  the  body  in  a  grave. 

2.  As  to  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  she  teaches  that! 
His  second  coming  was  in  the  coming  of  "Christian  Science"/ 
(p.  599).    With  which  compare  pp.  43  and  293. 

3.  Of  the  resurrection,  she  declares  that  it  is  "Spirituali- 
zation  of  thought;  a  new  and  higher  idea  of  immortality,  or 
spiritual  existence;  material  belief  yielding  to  spiritual  un- 
derstanding" (p.  584). 

But  while  the  Scripture  sometimes  uses  the  word  resurrec- 
tion in  a  metaphorical  sense,  it  often  uses  it  of  a  raising  lit- 
erally of  a  literal  man  (a  spiritual  and  corporeal  being). 
Thus  the  Bible  predicates  the  raising  of  Lazarus  from  bod- 
ily death.  See  John  XL  Thus  it  teaches  the  resurrection 
of  Christ.  Thus  it  teaches  that  the  resurrection  of  all  men 
is  to  occur. 


82  Some    Modern    Isms. 

4.  As  to  future  suffering,  she  says:  "Science  reveals  the 
necessity  of  sufficient  suffering,  either  before  or  after  death 
to  quench  the  love  of  sin.  To  remit  the  penalty  due  for  sin 
would  be  for  Truth  to  pardon  error"  (p.  341). 

But  "Science"  "reveals"  a  great  jumble;  for  it  reveals 
that  man  cannot  suffer,  that  he  is  the  reflection  of  God— 
the  infinite  idea  of  the  infinite  God— ever  blessed  and  per- 
fect; that  "he  is  incapable  of  sin  as  well  as  of  sickness  and 
death,  inasmuch  as  he  derives  his  essence  from  God,"  that 
"he  cannot  depart  from  holiness"  (p.  471).  Yet  as  above, 
"Science  reveals  the  necessity  of  sufficient  suffering,  either 
before  or  after  death  to  quench  the  love  of  sin.  To  remit 
the  penalty  due  for  sin  would  be  for  Truth  to  pardon  error" 
(p.  341). 

5th.  As  to  the  Judgment,  she  teaches: 

"No  final  judgment  awaits  mortals;  for  the  judgment  day 
of  Wisdom  comes  hourly  and  continually,  even  the  judg- 
ment by  which  mortal  man  is  divested  of  all  material  error. 
As  for  spiritual  error,  there  is  none"   (p.  182). 

But,  says  Paul,  God  "hath  appointed  a  day  in  the  which 
he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness  by  that  man  whom 
he  hath  ordained  whereof  he  hath  given  assurance,  in  that 
he  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead."    Acts  17  :31. 

Further,  why  does  Mother  Goose  (Eddy)  talk  of  sin,  if 
there  be  no  "spiritual  error?" 

How  different  the  eschatology  of  the  Scriptures: 

"The  souls  of  believers  are  at  their  death  made  perfect 
in  holiness,  and  do  immediately  pass  unto  glory;  and  their 
bodies  being  still  united  to  Christ,  do  rest  in  their  graves 
till  the  resurrection.  At  the  resurrection,  believers  being 
raised  up  in  glory,  shall  be  openly  acknowledged  and  ac- 
quitted in  the  day  of  judgment  and  made  perfectly  blessed 
in  the  full  enjoying  of  God  to  all  eternity." 

IV.  Christian  Science  as  a  System  of  Healing. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  83 

Christian  Scientists  are  wont  to  declare  that  there  is  no 
need  for  physicians,  that  the  profession  of  the  Surgeon  might 
be  abolished  for  the  good  of  humanity,  "that  Science"  can 
cure  every  disease  that  man  suffers  from  without  the  aid  of 
medicine  or  knife. 

Mrs.  Eddy  says: 

"My  first  plank  in  the  platform  of  Christian  Science  is  as 
follows:     There  is  no  life,  truth,  or  substance  in  matter." 

"Matter  is  unreal  and  temporal." 

"God  is  all  and  in  all.  What  can  be  more  than  all? 
Nothing;  and  this  is  just  what  I  call  matter — nothing." 

"Here  is  found  the  pith  of  the  basal  statement  of  the 
cardinal  point  of  Christian  Science,  that  matter  and  evil 
(including  all  inharmony,  sin,  disease,  death)   are  unreal." 

"Sin,  sickness,  and  death  ...  are  without  real 
origin,  or  existence.  They  have  neither  principle  nor  perm- 
anence, but  belong  with  all  that  is  material  or  temporal,  to 
the  nothingness  of  error  which  imitates  the  creation  of  deity." 

With  this  creed,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  that  Mrs.  Eddy 
and  her  followers  should  array  themselves  against  all  the 
intelligence  and  real  science  of  mankind.  If  her  creed  be 
correct,  no  sickness  ever  existed,  no  broken  arm  ever  needed 
setting,  no  teeth  ever  needed  pulling,  no  member  ever  needed 
amputation.  Do  you  wonder  that  her  creed  was  not  rectified 
by  her  senses?  She  denies  the  existence  of  the  senses.  Hear 
her   words: 

"Any  supposed  information  coming  from  the  body  or  from 
inert  matter,  as  if  they  were  intelligent,  is  an  illusion  of  the 
mortal  mind — one  of  its  dreams.  Realize  that  the  evidence 
of  the  senses  is  not  to  be  accepted  in  the  case  of  sickness 
any  more  than  in  the  case  of  sin." 

No  wonder  that  Mrs.  Eddy  and  her  followers  oppose  tlie 
medical  fraternity,  boards  of  health,  and  municipal  hygiene. 

Though  she  reiterates,  over  and  over  again,  that  there  is 


84  Some   Modern   Isms. 

no  such  thing  as  disease,  she  gives  careful  instructions  for 
the  healing  of  various  diseases.  See,  e.  g.,  pages  422  and 
423  of  ^'Science  mid  Health,"  her  instructions  as  to  the  treat- 
ment of  consumption: 

"If  the  case  to  be  mentally  treated  is  consumptive,  take 
up  the  leading  points  included  (according  to  belief)  in  this 
disease.  Show  that  it  is  not  inherited;  that  inflammation, 
tubercles,  hemorrhage  and  decomposition  are  beliefs,  images 
of  mortal  thoughts,  superinduced  upon  the  body;  that  they 
are  not  the  Truth  of  man;  that  they  should  be  treated  us 
error,'  and  put  out  of  thought.  Then  these  ills  will  disap- 
pear. If  the  lungs  are  disappearing,  this  is  but  one  of  the 
beliefs  of  mortal  mind.  Mortal  mind  will  be  less  mortal 
when  it  learns  that  lungs  never  sustained  existence  and  can 
never  destroy  life,  who  is  God.  When  this  is  understood, 
man  will  be  more  godlike.  What  if  the  lungs  are  ulcerated? 
God  is  more  to  a  man  than  his  lungs;  and  the  less  we 
acknowledge  matter  and  its  laws,  the  more  immortality  we 
possess.  Never  believe  that  lungs  or  any  portion  of  the 
body  can  destroy  you." 

Is  this  the  raving  of  an  insane  person?  May  you  live 
without  lungs  your  present  life?  Is  the  ^^•ay  to  rid  \our- 
self  of  disease  to  think  that  there  is  nothing  the  matter 
with   you? 

Such  "scientific"  instructions  as  the  following  are  given 
to  Mrs.  Eddy's  disciples: 

"He  who  is  ignorant  of  what  is  termed  hygienic  law  is 
more  receptive  of  spiritual  power  and  faith  in  one  God  than 
the  devotee  of  this  supposed  law"   (p.  381). 

"The  less  we  know  or  think  about  hygiene,  the  less  v,e 
are  predisposed  to  sickness"  (p.  388). 

"Physiology  is  one  of  the  apples  of  the  Tree  of  Knowl- 
edge— error  declared  that  eating  this  fruit  would  open  man"- 
eyes  and  make  him   a  god.     Instead  of  so  doing,  it  clo-t- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  85 

man's  eyes  to  man's  God-given  dominion  over  the  earth. 
Obedience  to  the  so-called  physical  laws  of  health  have  not 
checked  sickness." 

''Physiology  exalts  matter  and  dethrones  mind"   (p.  43). 

"When  there  are  fewer  doctors  and  less  thought  given  to 
sanitary  subjects  there  will  be  better  constitutions  and  less 
disease"   (p.  67). 

"In  families  where  laws  of  health  are  strictly  observed 
there  is  most  sickness."     (Miscellaneous  Writings,  p.  6)- 

No  wonder,  we  repeat,  that  Christian  Scientists  neglect 
all  precautions  against  the  spread  of  disease,  and  disregard 
the  sanitary  laws  of  towns,  clash  with  boards  of  health,  and 
let  many  of  their  patients  die  for  lack  of  simple  and  ac- 
cessible remedies. 

Do  Christian  Scientists  do  cures? 

Yes,  on  hypochondriacs. 

Mark  Twain  tells  us  of  his  experiences: 

"The  Christian  Scientist  was  not  able  to  cure  my  stomach 
ache  and  my  cold;  but  the  horse  doctor  did  it.  This  con- 
vinces me  that  Christian  Science  claims  too  much.  In  my 
opinion  it  ought  to  let  diseases  alone  and  confine  itself  to 
surgery.     There  it  would  have  everything  its  own  way. 

"The  horse  doctor  charged  me  thirty  kreutzers,  and  I  paid 
him;  in  fact,  I  doubled  it  and  gave  him  a  shilling.  Mrs. 
Fuller  brought  in  an  itemized  bill  for  a  crate  of  broken 
bones  mended  in  two  hundred  and  thirty-four  places — one 
dollar  a  fracture. 

"Nothing  exists  but  Mind?" 

"Nothing,"  she  answered,  "All  else  is  substanceless,  all 
else  is  imaginary." 

'T  gave  her  an  imaginary  check,  and  now  she  is  suing  me 
for  substantial  dollars.  It  looks  inconsistent."  (Christian 
Science,  p.  38).     See  also  Ibid.,  p.  64-65. 

Christian  Science  may  also  encourage  the  really  sick  to 
hope  for  health  and  thus  help  cure  them. 


86  Some   Modern    Isms. 

The  like  cures  have  been  wrought  throughout  the  ages. 

V.   The  System  Known  By  Its  Fruits. 

Bom  at  Bow,  near  Concord,  New  Hampshire,  July  16, 
1821,  Mary  Baker  grew  up  an  agile,  lithe,  graceful  girl, 
with  an  imperious  will  and  a  nervous  hysterical  tempera- 
ment. She  was  married  first  in  1843,  to  George  Washing- 
ton Glover,  a  young  brick-layer,  who  died  about  one  year 
later.  She  bore  one  child  to  this  husband.  For  that  child 
she  "never  showed  any  affection."  For  some  years  she  lived 
with  her  old  father  and  during  the  whole  period  punctured 
the  time  with  nervous  collapses.  In  1853  she  was  mar- 
ried a  second  time,  to  Dr.  Daniel  Patterson,  who  bore 
with  her  tantrums  for  some  years.  In  1862  she  visited  "Dr." 
Quimby,  of  Portland,  Maine,  who  practiced  mind-healing; 
claimed  to  have  been  healed  by  him,  and  became  his  en- 
thusiastic admirer  and  disciple.  She  taught  the  Quimby 
method  of  healing  up  to  about  1868  or  1870.  About  the 
year  1870,  she  began  to  represent  herself  as  having  re- 
ceived, in  1866,  by  special  revelation  from  God,  the  system 
of  Christian  Science.  She  published  her  book  Science  and 
Health,  in  1875,  a  book  which  she  had  to  revise  many 
times,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  it  was  "given  by  im- 
mediate revelation."  She  married,  in  1877,  A.  G.  Eddy, 
who  died  in  1882.  Between  1870  and  the  end  of  her  life, 
she  became  immensely  wealthy. 

Her  life,  after  she  developed  her  system,  showed  no  im- 
provement in  character.  She  was  a  liar,  and  an  impostor 
to  the  end,  full  of  arrogance,  and  all  impiety,  making  her- 
self a  greater  than  Christ. 

Her  dishonesty  is  evidenced  by  the  following:  In  1887, 
in  the  June  issue  of  the  Christian  Science  Journal,  she  af- 
firms: "As  long  ago  as  1844,  I  was  convinced  that  mortal 
mind  produced  all  disease."  "In  1862  I  was  proclaiming 
that  Science  must  govern  all  healing,"  but  in  the  first  edi- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  87 

tion  of  Science  and  Health,  issued  in  1875,  it  is  stated  that 
its  author  first  learned  in  1864  that  "Science  mentally  ap- 
plied would  heal  the  sick."  She  has  affirmed  again:  "It 
was  in  Massachusetts,  February,  1866,  and  after  the  death 
of  the  magnetic  doctor,  Mr.  P.  P.  Quimby,  whom  Spiritual- 
ists would  associate  therewith,  but  who  was  in  no  wise  con- 
nected with  this  event,  that  I  discovered  the  Science  of  Meta- 
physical Healing,  which  I  afterwards  named  Christian 
Science."  (Marsden,  The  Mask  of  Christian  Science,  pp. 
43-44). 

Mark  Twain,  after  an  exhaustive  study  of  Mrs.  Eddy's 
known  writings  and  comparison  of  them  with  Science  and 
Health,  sums  up  his  conclusions: 

"Inasmuch  as — in  my  belief — the  very  first  editions  of 
the  book  Science  and  Health,  were  far  above  the  reach  of 
Mrs.  Eddy's  mental  and  literary  abilities,  I  think  she  has 
from  the  very  beginning  been  claiming  as  her  own  another 
person's  book  and  wearing  as  her  own  property  laurels  right- 
fully belonging  to  that  person — the  real  author  of  Science 
and  Health.  And  I  think  the  reason — and  the  only  reason — 
that  he  has  not  protested,  is  because  his  work  was  not  ex- 
posed to  print  until  after  he  was  safely  dead."  M.  Twain, 
Christian  Science,  p.  292,  Cf.,  also  pp.  289-292. 

As  illustrative  of  her  arrogant  and  blasphemous  claims 
may  be  cited,  from  Science  and  Health,  pp.  551-552,  the 
following : 

"The  twelfth  chapter  of  the  Apocalypse — or  Revelation  of 
Saint  John — has  a  special  suggestiveness  in  connection  with 
the  nineteenth  century.  In  the  opening  of  the  Sixth  Seal, 
typical  of  six  thousand  years  since  Adam,  the  distinctive 
feature  has  special   reference  to  the  present  age. 

"Revelation  12:1.  And  there  appeared  a  great  wonder  in 
Heaven — a  woman  clothed  with  the  sun,  and  the  moon  under 
her  feet,  and  upon  her  head  a  crown  of  twelve  stars." 


83  Some   Modern   Isms. 

Another  instance: 

"While  we  entertain  decided  views  .  .  .  and  shall 
express  them  as  duty  demands,  we  shall  claim  no  special  gift 
from  our  divine  origin"  (cited  from  her  Miscellaneous  Writ- 
ings, by  M.  Twain,  Christian  Science,  p.  149). 

Another  instance: 

"No  person  can  take  the  individual  place  of  the  Virgin 
Mary.  No  person  can  compose  or  fulfill  the  individual 
mission  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  No  person  can  take  the 
place  of  the  author  of  Science  and  Health,  the  discoverer 
and  founder  of  Christian  Science.  Each  individual  must  fill 
his  own  niche  in  time  and  eternity."  Autobiography,  p.  96, 
quoted  in  M.  Twain.  Ibid,  p.  146.  See  also  :M.  Twain. 
Ibid.,  pp.  22-24,  44-46,  67-70. 

Another  instance: 

"It  is  often  asked  why  Christian  Science  was  revealed  to 
me — as  one  annihilating  the  false  testimony  of  the  physical 
senses.  .  .  •  No  one  else  can  drain  the  cup  which  I 
have  drunk  to  the  dregs,  as  the  discoverer  and  teacher  of 
Christian  Science;  neither  can  its  inspiration  be  gained  with- 
out tasting  the  cup.  ...  No  mortal  could  have  first 
informed  the  human  mind  of  what  the  mortal  and  carnal 
cannot  discern." 

Another  instance: 

" 'In  the  Christian  Science  Journal  for  April,  1889,  when 
it  was  her  property,  and  published  by  her,  it  was  claimed 
for  her,  and  with  her  sanction,  that  she  was  equal  with  Jesus. 
and  elaborate  effort  was  made  to  establish  the  claim.'  " 

"'Mrs.  Eddy  has  distinctly  authorized  the  claim  in  her 
behalf,  that  she  herself  was  the  chosen  successor  to  and 
equal  of  Jesus.'  " 

"The  following  remark  in  that  April  number,  quoted  by 
Mr.  Peabody,  indicates  that  her  claim  had  been  previously 
made,  and  had  excited  'horror'  among  some  'good  people': 


Some    Modern    Isms.  89 

"  'Now,  a  word  about  the  horror  many  good  people  have 
of  our  making,  the  author  of  Science  and  Health  'equal  with 
Jesus.'  " 

"Surely,  if  it  had  excited  horror  in  ISIrs.  Eddy  also,  she 
would  have  published  a  disclaimer.  She  owned  the  paper; 
she  could  say  what  she  pleased  in  its  columns.  Instead  of 
rebuking  her  editor,  she  lets  him  rebuke  those  'good  people' 
for  objecting  to  the  claim. 

"These  things  seem  to  throw  light  upon  those  words  'our 
(my)  divine  origin."     Christian  Science,  pp.  354-355. 

Mark  Twain  has  given  the  following  brief  description  of 
Mrs.  Eddy's  character  after  a  study  extending  through  sev- 
eral years: 

"Grasping,  sordid,  jenurious,  famishing  for  everything  she 
sees — money,  power,  glory — vain,  untruthful,  jealous,  de- 
spotic, arrogant,  insolent,  pitiless  where  thinkers  and  hypno- 
tists are  concerned,  illiterate,  shallow,  incapable  of  reason- 
ing outside  of  commercial  lines,  immeasurably  selfish." 
Christian  Science,  p.  285. 

"By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them,"  says  a  better  author- 
ity than  Mrs.  Eddy. 

How  are  you  to  meet  Christian  Science  in  a  community 
infected : 

Take  Luther's  method  of  dealing  with  the  Zwickan 
Prophets : 

1.  He  did  not  name  the  cattle. 

2.  He  preached  the  truth  which  they  misinterpreted,  and 
they  fled. 

II.  To  put  this  suggestion  otherwise: 

1.  Christian  Science  denies  the  doctrine  of  Providence. 
Preach  that  doctrine  and  the  comfort  it  gives  to  the  child 
of  God,  as  it  is  set  forth  in  Rom.  8. 

2.  Christian  Science  denies  sin,  preach  that  doctrine  and 


90  Some   Modern    Isms. 

prove  it  from  history,  consciousness,  and  God's  word.     You 
will   carry   conviction. 

.3.  Christian  Science  magnifies  its  cures.  Show  that 
throughout  the  ages  similar  cures  have  been  wrought — cures 
of  hypochondriacs,  and  cures  of  persons  really  ill,  but  who 
needed  not  only  physical  remedies  but  the  aid  of  the  will 
to  live  and  of  hope  to  live.  For  the  influence  of  the  mind 
over  the  bodv  is  considerable. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  91 


The  Unity  School  of 

Christianity; 
and  New  Thoughtism 


92  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Wayward  Children  of  Mother  Eddy:- 

Mrs.  Eddy  has  some  bastard  ecclesiastical  offspring. 
Amongst  these  is  the  Unity  School  of  Christianity,  with  its 
headquarters  in  Kansas  City,  Mo.  This  School  claims  a 
devotion  to  what  it  terms  "Practical  Christianity  and  Chris- 
tian Healing".  It  claims  to  be  an  exponent  of  the  doctrine 
of  Jesus  Christ,  to  apply  that  teaching  to  the  affairs  of  daily 
life,  to  explain  how  it  affects  the  body,  producing  sickness 
or  health,  and  to  show  how  man  may  produce  conditions  of 
health,  happiness  and  prosperity  in  his  life  here  and  now. 

That  it  is  a  child  of  Christian  Science  is  proven  by  many 
marks:  its  peculiar  form  of  pantheism,  its  doctrine  of  provi- 
dence, its  doctrine  of  mortal  mind,  its  doctrine  of  salvation, 
its  doctrine  of  the  Devil,  its  doctrine  as  to  the  power  of  af- 
firmations and  denials,  its  doctrine  of  faith.  These  un- 
mistakably point  to  ^lother  Eddy  as  parent,  notwithstand- 
ing elements  of  change  which  have  been  introduced. 

The  doctrine  of  prayer  is  not  as  annihilative  of  the  ex- 
ercise as  Mrs.  Eddys.  There  is  an  independence  of  Mrs. 
Eddy's  government.  There  is  an  effort  at  an  independent 
exposition  of  Scripture  and  of  philosophy.  There  is  an 
irenicism  toward  Christian  sects  more  honest  than  Mrs. 
Eddy's;  but  the  school  or  schools,  for  the  unity  is  only  a 
claimed  one,  is  at  bottom  Eddyite. 

It  hardly  calls  for  separate  refutation.  The  refutation 
of  Christian  Science  is  the  refutation  of  The  Unity  School 
of  Christianity.  The  literature  of  the  school  may  be  hap- 
pily sampled  in  Cady:  Lesson  in  Truth,  Fillmore:  Chris- 
tian Healing. 

Another  bastard  child  of  Mrs.  Eddy's  is  New  Thought. 

For  an  illustration  of  New  Thought  teaching  see  Paul 
Ellsworth's  The  Gist  of  New  Thought.     According  to  this 


Some    Modern    Isms.  93 

booklet:  Our  well  being  is  to  be  attained  only  by  recogniz- 
ing that  "man  is  but  the  outward  terminal  of  an  inner 
life  and  power,  and  that  fully  and  perfectly  to  express  this 
unseen  life,   he  must  bring  his  desires   and   activities   into 

harmony  with  its  purposes  and  laws  of  action" ^that 

we  are  modes  of  God  and  have  all  the  forces  of  the  divine 
nature  on  which  to  draw,  in  order  to  the  reaching  of  our 
highest  well  being.  Morning  and  night,  therefore,  we  are 
to  make  the  following  statement  ours:  "/  am  an  expression  of 
Divine  life,  and  in  vitality,  in  body,  and  affairs  I  shou 
forth  the  limitless  love,  power  and  wisdom  of  my  Father.'' 

"The  only  limit  in  regard  to  Mind  Power  is  that  it  must 
be  used  creatively."  This  follows  from  "The  fact  of  oneness 
of  all  life."  Hence  man  should  school  himself  to  sav 
"Thou  in  me  art  creative  love,  and  in  every  thought,  desire 
and  action  I  express  thy  nature." 

To  transform  a  life  of  failure,  sickness  or  disappoint- 
ment into  one  of  glorious  success,  advantage  must  be  taken 
of  two  principles:  (1)  Man  has  not  within  his  boundaries 
all  the  materials  for  mastery.  Beyond  and  above  him  is 
his  own  Greater  Self,  his  Spiritual  Self,  which  is  one  with 
the  Father,  and  only  as  he-  finds  himself  in  this  higher  cen- 
tre of  consciousness  can  he  speak  with  authority.  (2) 
Truth  never  changes  or  diminishes,  but  only  the  part  of  it 
ivhich  we  put  to  work  is  of  avail  to  us.  We  must  address 
this  living  but  unseen  presence  "which  is  one  with  us  in 
all  that  is  real  and  eternal  in  our  being  and  claim  this 
unity  by  saying,  e.  g.  "/  am  in  Thee,  and  Thou  in  me." 
"Thou  art  in  me  glorious  health."  By  bringing  ourselves 
into  use  of  our  "subjective"  or  subconscious  mind,  into  the 
use  of  the  Father  we  can  speak  with  authority,  speak  as 
God. 

The  results  will  not  come  at  once,  but  come  they  will. 

To   get   away    from   sickness   you    must   get   out   of   the 


94  Some   Modern    Is>.rs. 

world.  And  the  key  here  is  affirmation,  the  direct  and 
dynamic  statement  of  Truth.  The  truth  is  that  as  the  child 
of  God  you  are  not  subject  to  sickness.  The  Father,  work- 
ing in  and  through  you,  is  Health,  and  Power,  and  Joy. 
It  is  only  your  limited,  personal  self  that  builds  sickness  and 
imperfection.  In  order  to  heal  "Take  any  direct  and  simple 
statement  of  your  unity  with  him.  Thou  in  me  are  glorious 
health,  or  /  am  in  Thee  and  Thou  in  Me.  "In  the  work 
of  healing  or  bodily  regeneration  your  power  lies  in  the 
fact  that  you  are  the  expression  of  infinite  resources.  And 
you  are  to  apply  this  power  first  by  accepting  it  and  putting 
it  into  the  dynamic  form  of  affirmation;  second,  by  visualiz- 
ing it,  seeing  your  body  vibrant  wath  the  divine  life  which 
you  are,  third,  by  feeding  it,  searching  out  those  life  vi- 
brations which  have  been  long  sending  you  their  message 
of  co-operation,  but  which  you  have  ignored;  and  fourth, 
by  making  such  readjustments  in  your  habits  of  thinking, 
feeling  and  doing  as  the  Spirit  of  Wisdom  teaches  you-  to 
make." 

The  truth  that  frees  is  to  be  gotten  not  by  observation  nor 
by  reason  but  by  wisdom,  the  influx  into  the  soul  of  Di- 
vine Light. 

To  realize  wisdom  affirm: 

"Thou  in  me  art  illumination,  and  through  Thee  I  know 
the  truth  which  frees  from  every  limitation. 

"I  am  the  light  of  the  world;  if  any  man  follow  me, 
he  shall  not  walk  in  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of 
life."  ..    .• 

"Man  has  a  providence,  faculty  or  center  within  him, 
which,  when  connected  directly  with  the  central  power-house 
of  Divine  Mind  will  unfailingly  attend  to  the  work  of  ma- 
terial supply." 

"Here  are  some  key  thoughts  to  help  you  quicken  this 
providing   faculty:" 


Some    Modern    Isms.  95 

"Thou  art  my  filling  supply,  and  in  Thee  I  express  hnan- 
cial  mastery." 

"I  thank  Thee,  Father,  that  even  now  Thou  dost  bring 
into  visibility  in  my  life  all  that  I  desire." 

'T  am  creative  mastery  and  financial  success;  abundant 
supply  comes  naturally  and  unfailingly  to  me,  because  I 
am  attractive  to  it." 

"Here  are  a  few  affirmations  for  bringing  out  creative 
mastery." 

"It  is  not  I  but  the  Father  in  me  who  doeth  this  work." 

I  can  do  all  things  through  the  Christ  life  which  quick- 
enth  me. 

"Thou  in  me  art  glorious  power,  creative  mastery,  and  in 
Thee   I   work   swiftly   and   perfectly. 

"Thou  are  the  reality  of  my  being,  and  Thou  are  glorious 
health,  masterful  expression  and  abounding  financial  suc- 
cess. 

Remarks : 

1st.  It  is  clear  that  Ellsworth's  New  Thought  is  pan- 
thesim,  and  of  the  Christian  Science  type,  fundamentally; 
God  is  the  one  reality.    Men  and  things  are  God's  expression. 

2nd.  The  same  absurd  system  of  healing,  essentially  is 
taught,  to  wit,  by  thinking  that  you  are  God  and  that,  as  God 
cannot  be  sick,  you  cannot  be  sick. 

The  similarilty  to  Christiaii  Science  is  such  that  we 
easily  accept  the  historic  evidence  as  valid,  that  New 
Thought  is  the  bastard  child  of  Mother  Eddv. 


96  Some   Modern   Isms. 


Russeilism 

This  is  one  of  the  most  insidious 
of  all  the  modernisms 


Some   Modern    Isms.  97 


Literature  on  Russellism 


C.  T.  Russell,  Studies  in  the  Scriptures,  6  Series. 

Lawyer,  A  Great  Ecclesiastical  Battle  in  the  Heavens. 

Haldeman,  Two  Men  and  Russellism. 

Haldeman,  A  Great  Counterfeit,  or  The  False  and  Blasphe- 
mous, Religion  Called  Russellism  and  Millennial  Dawn- 
ism. 

Haldeman,  Millennial  Dawnism,  the  Blasphemous  Religion 
Which  Teaches  the  Annihilation  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Chas.  C.  Cook,  More  Data  on  Pastor  Russell 

I.  I.  Ross,  Some  Facts  and  More  Facts  about  the  Self-Styled 
Pastor  Russell  {of  Millennial  Dawn  Fame.) 

Chas  C.  Cook,  All  About  One  Russell. 


98  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Russellism 


By  Russellism  is  meant  the  teaching  of  Charles  T.  Rus- 
sell, as  set  forth  in  his  work,  once  published  in  (six)  vol- 
umes, entitled  "Millennial  Dawn,"  and  later  published  un- 
der the  caption  "Studies  in  the  Scriptures." 

This  work  claims  for  itself  publication  under  the  auspices 
of  the  "International  Bible  Students  Association,  Brooklyn, 
London,  Melbourne,  Bremen,  Elberfield,  Orebro,  Christina." 
The  copyright  is  held  by  "Watch  Tower  Bible  and  Tract 
Society,  Brooklyn,  U.  S.  A."  A  note  on  the  reverse  of  the 
title  page  of  volume  I,  asserts  that  "This  volume  can  also 
be  supplied  in  the  German,  Swedish,  Dano-Norwegian,  Fin- 
nish, French,  Greek,  Italian,  Hungarian,  Hollandish,  Span- 
ish, Polish,  Slovak,  Arabic,  Chinese  and  Japanese  languages, 
also  in  Braille  (for  the  blind)." 

There  are  reasons  why  this  ism  should  be  given  a  degree 
of  study:  (1)  It  has  been  given  the  shrewdest  and  most 
efficient  advertising  over  vast  areas  of  this  earth's  surface. 
The  books  are  sold  at  a  nominal  price.  There  is  an  edition 
which  may  be  had  for  twenty-five  cents  per  volume.  They 
are  given  to  persons  who  wish  them,  but  are  too  poor  to  buy 
'  them.  The  views  set  forth  in  them  are  published  also  in 
millions  of  tracts  and  in  the  official  paper,  or  magazine, 
known  as  "The  Herald  of  Christ's  presence."  (2)  The  ism 
^  makes  a  powerful  appeal  to  people,  of  small  capacity  to 
reason,  or  small  disposition  to  study  God's  word  in  a  his- 
toric way,  of  large  credulity,  of  readiness  to  follow  the 
teacher  who  will  speak  with  an  air  of  prophetic  certainty,  or 
reason  plausibly — to  such  people,  when  conscious  of  sin  and 
in  dread  of  its  consequences.      (3)    It  has  already  infected 


Some   Modern    Is:ms.  99 

and  unsettled  vast  numbers  of  such  people;  and  it  has  both- 
ered many  of  a  different  and  nobler  type.  The  latter  have 
not  yet  received  it,  but  for  lack  of  time,  or  conveniences,  they 
have  not  been  able  to  appraise  Russellism  in  a  satisfactory 
way,  and  to  fix  upon  a  proper  course  of  conduct  to  be  pur- 
sued with  reference  to  it.  (4)  It  is  a  pernicious,  blasphemous 
and  Satanic  teaching — lulling  to  sleep  multitudes,  many  of 
whom  might,  but  for  it,  be  led  to  seek  life  eternal  in  Christ 
Jesus. 

For  these  and  kindred  reasons  the  following  sketch  and 
criticism  of  Russellism  has  been  made. 

1.  0/  Russell's  Theology  Proper,  or  his  doctrine,  as  to 
the  existence  and  attributes  of  the  Gods,  as  to  the  Plan  of 
the  Supreme  God;  as  to  creation  and  as  to  Providence. 

1st.     His  doctrine  of  the  Gods: 

1.  With  some  considerations  of  force  and  with  others  des- 
titute of  either  force  or  plausibility,  Russell  teaches  that  the 
light  of  nature  discloses  the  existence  of  a  supreme  intelli- 
gent creator,  of  immeasurable  power  and  wisdom,  benevo- 
lence and  justice,  who  will  make  known  to  his  intelligent 
creatures  his  plan  concerning  them  in  "some  such  revela- 
tion as  the  Bible  claims  to  be;  and  maintains  the  view  that 
the  Bible  is  a  divinely  inspired  revelation." 

Notwithstanding  this  expressed  view  of  the  Bible,  we  must 
beware  of  thinking  that  he  gives  the  Bible  the  premier  place 
in  the  teaching  of  theological  truth.  On  page  198,  of  his 
^'Watch  Tower"  of  the  issue  of  September  15,  1910,  it  is 
written  concerning  his  books: 

"If  the  six  volumes  of  'Scripture  Studies'  are  practically 
the  Bible,  topically  arranged,  with  Bible  proof  texts  given, 
we  might  not  improperly  name  the  volumes,  'The  Bible  in 
Arranged  Form.'  That  is  to  say,  they  are  not  merely  com- 
ments on  the  Bible,  but  they  are  practically  the  Bible  itself. 
"Furthermore,   not   only  do  we   find  that  people 


100  Some    Modern    Isms. 

cannot  see  the  divine  plan  in  studying  the  Bible  by  itself, 
but  we  see  also  that  if  any  one  lays  the  'Scripture  Studies' 
aside,  even  after  he  has  used  them,  after  he  has  become 
familiar  with  them,  after  he  has  read  them  for  ten  years — if 
he  lays  them  aside  and  ignores  them  and  goes  to  the  Bible 
alone,  though  he  has  understood  his  Bible  for  ten  years,  our 
experience  shows  that  within  two  years,  he  goes  into  dark- 
ness. On  the  other  hand,  if  he  had  merely  the  Scripture 
studies,  with  their  references  and  had  not  read  a  page  of 
the  Bible  as  such  he  would  be  in  the  right  at  the  end  of 
the  two  years,  because  he  would  have  the  light  of  the 
Scriptures."  (Quoted  in  Chas.  C.  Cook's  "All  About  One 
Russell,"  pp.  13-14). 

It  thus  appears  that  the  Bible  is  light-giving  according 
to  Russell,  only  as  interpreted  by  himself. 

From  the  Scriptures  thus  "reasonably  interpreted"  (i.  e., 
interpreted  according  to  Russell's  views),  and  from  many  in- 
terpolations from  his  own  "reason"  such  as  to  give  the  Scrip- 
tures the  sense  which  he  wishes  to  find  in  them,  he  pro- 
ceeds to  set  forth  his  views  concerning  the  nature  of  the 
Gods. 

2.  Of  "the  God,"  the  one  Almighty  God,  Russell  teaches 
that  He  has  "mind  and  body."  He  says:  "Some  may  be 
a  little  startled  by  this  expression,  'a  divine  body,'  but  we 
are  told  that  Jesus  is  the  express  image  of  his  Father's 
person.  .  .  .  We  could  not  imagine  either  our  divine 
Father  or  our  Lord  Jesus  as  merely  great  minds  without 
bodies,"  p.  200,  Vol  I.,  "Studies  in  the  Scriptures." 

Now,  God,  in  His  word,  not  only  gives  us  no  ground  for 
regarding  Him  as  having  a  body,  but  represents  himself  as 
pure  spirit,  ascribing  to  Himself  attributes  such  as  unchange- 
ableness,  unity,  omnipresence,  which  body  cannot  have.  "God 
is  a  Spirit,"  John  4:24;  "The  heaven  and  heaven  of  heav- 
ens cannot  contain  Thee,"  I  Kings  8:27;   "Who   (the  Son) 


Some   Modern   Isms.  101 

is  the  image  of  the  invisible  God,"  Col.  1:15;  "the  invisible," 
I  Tim.  1:17;  "As  seeing  Him  who  is  invisible,"  Heb.  11:27. 

3.  Russell,  in  his  further  teaching  concerning  God,  mis- 
represents ridicules  and  denies  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

(1)  He  misrepresents  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which 
he  calls  "this  confusing  doctrine  of  men"  (Vol.  5,  p.  54),* 
and  declares  that  for  it  "no  authority  can  be  found  in  the 
word  of  God."  That  he  misrepresents,  ridicules  and  denies 
the  doctrine  is  clear  from  the  following  quotations: 

"How  could  there  be  three  Gods  and  yet  only  one  God. 
If  there  are  three  Gods,  "equal  in  power  and  glory,"  as  the 
catechisms  declare,  then  it  is  untrue  to  say  there  is  only 
one  God.  If  there  is  only  "one  God,  the  Father  of  whom 
are  all  things,"  as  St.  Paul  asserts;  and  if,  as  Jesus  de- 
clared, the  Father  is  greater  than  his  honored  Son;  and  if 
the  Father  raised  his  Beloved  Son  from  the  dead,  and  exalted 
him  on  high,  honored  him,  and  has  appointed  for  him  a 
Kingdom;  and  if  ultimately  the  Son  will  deliver  up  the 
Kingdom  again  to  the  Father,  that  he  may  be  all  in  all; 
then  it  cannot  be  true  that  there  are  several  Gods  of  equal 
po%ver.  Nevertheless,  we  shall  show  conclusively  in  the  suc- 
ceeding chapter  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  a  God,  but 
that  .  .  .  still  the  united  voice  of  the  Scriptures  most 
emphatically  assert  that  there  is  but  one  Almighty  God,  the 
Father  of  whom  are  all  things,"  Vol.  5,  p.  55. 

"Moreover,  the  words  'Father'  and  'Son'  imply  a  differ- 
ence and  contradict  the  thoughts  of  the  Trinity  and  one- 
ness of  person,  because  the  word  "father"  signifies  life-giver, 
while  the  word  'son'  signifies  the  one  who  has  received  life 
from  another,"  Vol.  5,  p.  60. 

"The  idea  of  claiming  three  Gods,  and  at  the  same  time 
claiming  that  the  three  were  only  one  God,  was  no  doubt 
considered  a  masterstroke  in  theology  by  which  the  views 


•These  references  to   volumes   and   pages   are  to   the   volumes   and   pages 
of  "Studies  in  the  Scriptures,"  by  Russell. 


102  Some    Modern    Isms. 

of  believers  converted  from  amongst  the  Jews  could  be 
brought  into  closer  accord  with  the  general  sentiments  of 
the  Gentiles,  who,  it  was  desired,  should  be  pleased  and 
brought  into  the  Church."     Vol.  5,  p.  63. 

''At  the  same  time  it  is  admitted  that  the  doctrine  is  in- 
comprehensible, and  therefore  that  nobody  really  believes  it, 
because  nobody  can,  in  a  true  sense,  believe  an  incompre- 
hensible thing.  And  various  doctrines  and  practices,  not 
only  of  Protestantism,  but  also  of  Catholicism,  deny  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity:  note,  for  instance,  that  all  Protestants 
pray  to  the  Father,  'in  the  name  of  Jesus/  'for  Jesus'  sake,' 
etc.,  thus  recognizing  the  fact  that  there  are  two  separate 
persons  and  not  one  person.     Vol.  5,  p.  64. 

Again,  he  speaks  of  "the  unreasonable  and  unscriptural 
doctrine  of  a  Trinity — three  Gods  in  one  person."  Vol.  5, 
p.  76. 

Quotations  of  like  character  might  be  multiplied  in  sup- 
port of  our  present  contention  that  he  misrepresents  and  the 
ridicules  and  denies  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  To  them 
might  be  added  his  teachings  that  the  Son,  prior  to  his  being 
made  man,  existed  only  as  a  cieated,  angelic  existence,  and 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  nothing  more  than  the  influence,  cr 
power,  of  God,  that  He  has  no  distinct  personal  existence. 
Quotations  showing  unmistakably  that  he  does  these  latter 
things  are  to  be  given  later. 

(2)  Contrast  now  the  true  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity as  held  by  the  Greek  and  Roman  Catholic  Churches. 

"There  are  three  persons  in  the  Godhead:  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  these  three  are  one  God,  the 
same  in  substance,  equal  in  power  and  glory." 

This  is  no  doctrine  of  tritheism — that  there  are  three  in- 
dividual Gods.  We  shall  find  Russell  teaching,  that  there 
is  a  plurality  of  Gods  now — that  the  Almighty,  the  God  who 
always  has  been,  exists  now;  and  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 


Some    Modern    Isms.  103 

has  been  made  a  God,  and  exists  as  such  now;  and,  appar- 
ently that  true  believers  who  sacrificed  their  lives  in  the 
gospel  age  have  been  made  Gods  and  exist  as  such  now. 
But  of  this  hereafter.  Observe  that  in  his  pantheon  there  are 
at  least  two  Gods — the  eternal  self-existent  God  and  a  be- 
ing who  has  been  created  a  God.  His  view  of  Christ  ap- 
proaches that  of  the  heretic  Arius.     He  is  a  kind  of  ditheist. 

The  orthodox  doctrine  distinguishes  between  substance  and 
person,  a  distinction  to  which  Russell  seems  to  be  dead; 
it  affirms  one  substance  but  a  three-fold  personal  distinction 
in  this  one  substance.  The  church  was  driven  to  this  doc- 
trine by  the  clear  Scripture  teaching  that  God  is  one,  and 
yet  that  the  Father  is  God,  the  Son  is  God  and  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  God.  It  does,  of  course,  not  teach  that  God  is 
one  and  three  in  the  same  sense.  It  is  guilty  of  no  contra- 
diction, just  as  it  is  guilty  of  no  contradiction  when  it  as- 
serts that  man  is  dual  as  to  substance  unitary  as  to  per- 
sonality. 

The  evidences  for  the  truth  of  a  doctrine  may  be  the 
strongest  and  yet  the  doctrine  incomprehensible.  Here  is 
John  Smith,  who  teaches  that  a  Jersey  cow  feeding  on  a 
blue  grass  field,  turns  some  portions  of  her  feed  into  con- 
stituents of  milk  and  other  portions  into  fat  and  others  into 
muscles.  Now,  must  I  wait  till  I  can  comprehend  every- 
thing about  these  processes — how  they  are  carried  on — be- 
fore believing  what  said  Smith  teaches  as  to  the  cow's  uses 
of  the  grass  in  these  ways.  Further,  C.  T.  Russell  should, 
of  all  men,  for  his  own  sake,  avoid  teaching  that  a  man 
cannot  believe  what  he  cannot  comprehend.  For  he  teaches 
amongst  many  incomprehensible  things  concerning  his  Christ 
some  impossible  things,  e.  g.,  that  he  was  changed  from  a 
"spirit  being"  into  a  "human  being,"  which,  he  teaches,  is 
not  a  spirit,  even  in  part,  teaches  that  that  human  being, 
Jesus,  died,  became  non-existent,  and  remains  so  forever;  and 


104  Some   Modern    Isms. 

that  Jesus  Christ  was  called  into  existence  at  tlie  end  of 
three  days,  as  a  Spirit,  lives  today  and  ever  will  as  a  Spirit 
being,  and  of  a  type  infinitely  higher  than  that  of  his  former 
spirit  being,  having  been  elevated  to  the  divine  nature.  Rus- 
sell's teachings  teem  not  only  with  incomprehensibles,  but 
with  real  impossibles  and  contradictories;  but  let  us  now 
to  his  doctrine  of  the  Son. 

4.  Russell  teaches  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Hear  his 
words : 

''Some  claimed  that  he  (Christ)  was  an  impostor:  Some 
that  he  was  merely  a  good  man :  some  that  he  had  a  miracul- 
ous birth,  but  never  had  a  pre-existence;  and  others  held  the 
truth,  viz.,  that  he  had  pre-existence  as  a  Son  of  God  on  a 
spiritual  plane,  that  he  became  the  Son  of  God  on  a  human 
plane,  in  order  to  redeem  mankind  and  that  now  he  is  high- 
ly exalted,  so  that  all  are  commanded  to  honor  "the  Son 
even  as  they  honor  the  Father."    Vol.  5,  pp.  62,  63. 

"Searching  the  Scriptures  carefully  to  note  just  what  they 
do  say,  and  what  they  do  not  say,  respecting  our  Lord  Jesus, 
we  find  their  testimony  ver}^  explicit,  harmonious  and  satis- 
factory. We  will  first  state  in  synoptical  form,  what  we  find 
to  be  the  Scriptural  teachings,  the  proofs  of  which  we  will 
give  further  along: 

"(1)  Our  Redeemer  existed  as  a  spirit  being  before  he 
was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  amongst  men. 

"(2)  At  that  time,  as  well  as  subsequently,  he  was  prop- 
erly known  as  'a  god' — a  mighty  one.  As  chief  of  the 
angels  and  next  to  the  Father,  he  was  known  as  the  Arch- 
angel (highest  angel  or  messenger),  whose  name,  Michael, 
signifies,  'Who  is  God,'  or  God's  representative. 

"(3)  As  he  was  the  highest  of  all  Jehovah's  creation,  so 
also  he  was  the  first,  the  direct  creation  of  God,  the  only 
begotten  and  then  he,  as  Jehovah's  representative,  and  in 
the  exercise  of  Jehovah's  power,  and  in  his  name,  created 


Some    Modern    Isms.  105 

all  things — angels,  principalities  and  powers,  as  well  as  the 
earthly  creation.     .      .     . 

♦'(4)  This  humiliation  to  Man's  condition  was  not  in- 
tended to  be  perpetual.  It  accomplished  its  purpose  when 
our  Lord  had  given  himself,  a  human  being,  as  our  ransom, 
or  * 'corresponding  price."  Hence,  his  resurrection  was  not 
in  the  flesh,  but,  as  the  Apostle  declares,  "He  was  put  to 
death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  in  Spirit.'     I  Pet.  3:18. 

"(5)  His  resurrection  not  only  restored  to  him  a  spirit 
nature,  but  in  addition  conferred  upon  him  a  still  higher 
honor,  and,  as  the  Father's  reward  for  his  faithfulness,  made 
him  partaker  of  the  divine  nature — the  very  highest  of  the 
Spirit  natures,  possessed  of  immortality."  Vol.  5,  pp.  83, 
84.     Cf.,  also,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  176,  179. 

The  meaning  of  these  statements  is  made  clearer  by  other 
statements  of  Russell's.     Thus  he  writes : 

"Nor  do  the  Scriptures  in  any  place  intimate  that  the 
existence  of  the  Only  Begotten  ever  ceased  from  the  time 
it  began,  as  "the  beginning  of  the  creation  of  God,"  until 
it  ceased  at  Calvary  for  three  days;  after  which  he  was 
raised  from  the  dead  to  die  no  more,  death  having  never 
more  dominion  over  him."     Vol.  5,  p.  90. 

Commenting  on  John  1:11,  "The  logos  was  made  flesh 
and  dwelt  among  us,"  he  writes: 

"The  comLion  thought  in  respect  to  our  Lord's  manifesta- 
tion in  the  flesh  is  usually  expressed  in  the  word  incaryiation. 
This  usual  thought  we  believe  to  be  wholly  incorrect,  un- 
scriptural."  (He  proceeds  to  show  that  he  does  not  under- 
stand the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  incarnation,  and  to  con- 
demn his  misconceived  doctrine),      (p.  94,  Vol.  5). 

"There  was  no  sham  about  it:  it  was  not  that  he  merely 
appeared  to  humble  himself,  while  really  retaining  his  glory 
and  powder:  it  was  not  that  he  seemed  to  become  poor  for 
our  sakes,  yet  actually  remained  rich  in  the  possession  of 


;106  Some    Modern    Isms. 

the  higher  spiritual  nature  all  the  time;  it  was  not  that  he 
merely  put  on  the  clothing,  the  livery,  of  a  servant.  No,  but 
he  actually  became  a  man — "the  man  Christ  Jesus  who  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all.'     I  Tim.  2:5." 

"We  shall  see  subsequently,  \^hen  we  come  to  consider  par- 
ticularly the  ransom  feature  of  his  work,  that  it  was  abso- 
lutely necessary  that  he  should  be  a  man — neither  more  nor 
less  than  a  perfect  man — because  it  was  a  man  that  sinned, 
a  man  that  was  redeemed,  and  the  divine  law  required  that 
a  man's  life  should  pay  the  redemption  price  of  a  man's 
life."     Vol.   5,  p.   95. 

"Nor  could  our  Lord  have  been  raised  from  the  dead  a 
man,  and  yet  have  left  with  Justice  our  ransom-price:  in 
order  to  the  release  of  Adam  and  his  condemned  race  from 
the  sentence  and  prison-house  of  Death,  it  was  necessary 
not  only  that  the  man  Christ  Jesus  should  die,  but  just  as 
necessary  that  the  man  Christ  Jesus  should  never  live  again, 
should  remain  dead,  should  remain  our  ransom-price  to  all 
eternity."     Vol.   5,  p.  454. 

He  teaches  that  Christ's  "human  existence  ended  on  the 
cross,"  that  "after  being  dead  three  days,  he  was  raised  to 
life — to  the  perfection  of  spirit  being — born  of  the  Spirit — 
'the  first-born  from  the  dead' —  .  .  .  Jesus,  therefore, 
at  and  after  his  resurrection,  was  a  spirit — a  spirit  being, 
and  no  longer  a  human  being  in  any  sense."  Vol.  1,  pp. 
230-231. 

He  writes: 

"Our  Lord's  being  or  soul  was  non-existent  during  the 
period  of  death.  'He  poured  out  his  soul  unto  death;  he 
made  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin.'  But  his  soul  (being) 
was  revived  in  resurrection,  being  granted  a  new  spiritual 
body."     Vol.  5,  p.  362. 

He  defines  soul  as  "sentient  being,  intelligence,  the  man 
himself,  the  being,  or  soul."    Vol.  5,  p.  308. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  107 

"Man's  superiority  over  the  beast,  according  to  the  ac- 
count given  in  Genesis,  consists  not  in  his  having  a  different 
kind  of  breath  or  spirit,  but  in  his  having  a  higher  form,  a 
superior  body,  a  finer  organism — endowed  with  a  brain  or- 
ganism which  enables  him  to  reason  upon  planes  far  above 
and  beyond  the  intelligence  of  the  lower  animals  of  the  brute 
creation."     Vol.  5,  p.  310. 

He  teaches  that  our  Lord  Jesus  "is  no  longer  a  man  but 
a  spirit  being,  whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  can  see  v.ithout 
a  miracle."     Vol.   2,  p.   131. 

"Our  Lord's  human  body  was,  however,  supernatuvally  re- 
moved from  the  tomb ;  because  had  it  remained  there  it  would 
have  been  an  insurmountable  obstacle  to  the  faith  of  the 
disciples,  who  were  not  yet  instructed  in  spiritual  things — for 
the  spirit  was  not  yet  given."  (John  7:39).  We  know- 
nothing  about  what  became  of  it,  except  that  it  did  not 
decay  or  corrupt.  (Acts  2:27,  31).  Whether  it  was  dis- 
solved into  gasses  or  whether  it  is  still  preserved  somewhere 
as  the  grand  memorial  of  God's  love,  of  Christ's  obedience 
and  of  our  redemption,  no  one  knows."    Vol.  2,  p.  129. 

"Neither  was  Jesus  a  combination  of  two  natures,  human 
and  spiritual.  The  blending  of  two  natures  produces  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other,  but  an  imperfect,  hybrid  thing,  which 
is  obnoxious  to  the  divine  arrangement.  When  Jesus  was 
in  the  flesh  he  was  a  perfect  human  being;  previous  to  that 
time  he  was  a  perfect  spiritual  being;  and  since  his  resur- 
rection he  is  a  perfect  spiritual  being  of  the  highest  or 
divine  order.  It  was  not  until  the  time  of  his  consecra- 
tion even  unto  death,  as  typified  in  his  baptism — at  thirty 
years  of  age  (manhood,  according  to  the  law%  and  therefore 
the  right  time  to  consecrate  himself  as  a  man) — that  he  re- 
ceived the  earnest  of  his  inheritance,  divine  nature.  (Matt. 
3:16,  17).  The  human  nature  had  to  be  consecrated  to  death 
before  he  could  receive  even  the  pledge  of  the  divine  nature. 


108  Some    Modern    Isms. 

And  not  until  that  consecration  was  actually  carried  out  and 
he  had  actually  sacrificed  the  human  nature,  even  unto  death, 
did  our  Lord  Jesus  become  a  full  partaker  of  the  divine 
nature.  After  becoming  a  man  he  became  obedient  unto 
death;  wherefore,  God  hath  highly  exalted  him  to  the  divine 
nature.  (Phil  2:8,  9).  If  this  Scripture  is  true,  it  follows 
that  he  was  not  exalted  to  the  divine  nature  until  the  human 
nature  was  actually  sacrificed — dead." 

"Thus  we  see  that  in  Jesus  there  was  no  mixture  of 
natures,  but  that  twice  he  experienced  a  change  of  nature, 
first  from  spiritual  to  human;  afterward  from  human  to  the 
highest  order  of  spiritual  nature,  the  divine;  and  in  each 
case  the  one  was  given  up  for  the  other."  Vol.  I.,  pp. 
179-180. 

Russell  teaches  also  an  inclusive  Christ,  or  an  extended 
Christ:  that  "Christ  includes  all  anointed  of  the  Spirit" 
(Vol.  1,  p.  85);  that  "the  Christ  (the  Anointed)  is  not  one 
member  but  many."     Vol.   1,  p.  82. 

"The  great  work  before  this  glorious  anointed  company — 
the  Christ — necessitates  their  exaltation  to  the  divine  nature; 
no  other  than  divine  power  could  accomplish  it.  Theirs  is 
a  work  pertaining  not  only  to  this  world,  but  to  all  things 
in  heaven  and  earth — among  spiritual  as  well  as  among 
human  beings."     Vol.  1,  pp.  289,  290. 

Russell  thus  teaches:  (1)  That  Christ  before  his  advent 
was  not  God,  but  a  created  angel.  (2)  That  when  he  was 
in  the  earth  he  was  neither  God,  nor  a  spirit  of  any  order 
of  being,  but  a  human  being,  body  with  the  spirit  of  Ufe, 
or  breath  of  life,  in  it.  (3)  That  his  atonement  was  ex- 
clusively human,  a  mere  man's.  (4)  That  since  his  resur- 
rection— really  creation  with  a  consciousness  precisely  like 
that  with  which  Jesus  passed  into  non-existence — he  is  a 
God — a  made  God.  (5)  That  Jesus'  body  was  not  raised 
[from  the  dead.  (6)  That  his  soul  became  non-existent  and 
must  continue  so  forever. 


Some   Modern    Isms.  109 

The  orthodox  Christology  which  Russell  either  miscon- 
ceives, or  intentionally  misrepresents,  is  briefly  set  forth  in 
the  answer  to  question  21  of  the  Westminster  Shorter  Cate- 
chism: "The  only  Redeemer  of  God's  elect  is  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  being  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  became  man, 
and  so  was  and  continued  to  be  God  and  man  in  two  dis- 
tinct natures  and  one  person  forever." 

The  bare  statement  of  Russell's  Christology  as  has  been 
done  above,  first  in  his  own  v.'ords,  and  then,  in  more  com- 
pact form,  in  our  words,  should  be  enough  to  kill  it.  The 
indulgent  hearer  will,  however,  it  is  hoped,  pardon  a  shot 
or  two  at  these  positions  of  Russell. 

(1)  John  1:1  says,  "The  word  was  God."  Reverent  and 
real  scholarship  says  of  this  passage,  "The  predicate  (God) 
stands  emphatically  first,  as  in  4:24.  It  is  necessarily  with- 
out the  article  Theos,  not  ho  Theos,  inasmuch  as  it  describes 
the  nature  of  the  Word  and  does  not  identify  His  Person.  It 
would  be  pure  Sabellianism  to  say  "the  word  was  ho  Theos." 
No  idea  of  inferiority  of  nature  is  suggested  by  the  form  of 
expression  which  simply  affirms  the  true  deity  of  the  Word," 
{Cannon  Westcott,  following  the  great  current  of  thoughtful 
and  learned  Bible  students  of  all  the  ages).  Three  majestic 
truths  are  set  forth  in  this  passage:  (a)  The  eternity  of 
the  Word.  In  beginning  {without  the  article)  was  (not 
came  into  existence)  the  Word.  Timeless  existence  is  predi- 
cated of  him.  (b)  The  eternal  personal  existence  is  set  forth. 
He  was  with  God.  By  the  Word  all  things  were  created  and 
enlightened,  (c)  His  deity  is  taught.  "And  the  Word  was 
God." 

(2)  If  Christ  was  an  honest  man,  he  was  also  more  than 
man — was  God — when  on  earth.  For  he  said,  "It  is  written, 
'Thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord,  thy  God,  and  him  only  shalt 
thou  serve,'  and  yet  he  said,  'the  Father  judgeth  no  man, 
but  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son,  that  all  men 


'i 


110  Some   Modern   Isms. 

should  honour  the  Son  even  as  they  honour  the  Father.'  He 
said,  "Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor  and  are  heavy  laden 
and  I  will  give  you  rest."  How  could  a  mere  man  so 
speak  without  sheer  impiety?  How,  as  a  mtre  man,  could 
he  make  himself  the  very  object  of  supreme  worship  in  the 
Lord's  Supper,  saying,  "This  do  in  remembrance  of  me?''. 
The  like  argument  might  be  made  from  many  passages  of 
Scripture.  Truly,  the  attributes,  works  and  worship  predi- 
cated of  Christ  in  the  Scriptures  represent  him  to  be  very 
God  of  very  God,  as  well  as  man. 

'  In  denying  that  Jesus  Christ  is  tlie  eternally  generated  Son 
of  God,  w^ho  took  a  perfect  human  nature  into  union  with 
himself,  that  he  was  at  once  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Son 
of  Man,  Russellism  accuses  Christ  of  falsehood  and  treason 

1  against  the  Most  High;  and  brings  him  before  man  as  the 
worst  fraud,  hypocrite  and  deceiver  of  the  world's  history 

idown  to  the  time  of  Mrs.  Eddy.  For  he  set  himself  up  to 
be  the  God  of  the  Universe. 
(3)  If  he  was  a  mere  creature  he  could  have  no  imputa- 
ble obedience,  active  or  passive;  and  could  work  out  no  re- 
demption, The  Scriptures  say,  "God  sent  forth  from  him- 
self his  Son,  born  of  a  woman  born  under  the  law,  to  re- 
deem them  that  were  under  the  law,"  Gal.  4:4,  5.  This 
Scripture  cannot  be  true  if  Russellism  be  true.  Again,  if 
he  was  a  mere  creature,  how  could  Paul  say,  "In  him  dwell- 
eth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily."  Col.  2:9.  How- 
could  we  explain  Isaiah  9:6,  "His  name  shall  be  called 
wonderful,  counselor,  the  mighty  God?" 

(4)  The  Scriptures  teach  not  that  the  Son  is  a  made  God, 
but  that  being  in  the  form  of  God,  he  humbled  himself  for 
man's  salvation;  and  hath,  in  consequence,  been  given  Media- 
torial lordship,  Phil.  2:6-11.  "The  form  of  a  thing  is  the 
mode  in  which  it  reveals  itself;  and  that  is  determined  by 
its  nature."     Chrysostom   said:     "It  is  not  possible  to  be 


Some   Modern    Isms.  Ill 

of  one  essence  and  to  have  the  form  of  another/'  He  was 
"God over  all  blessed  forever."  Rom.  9:5.  See  here  "Funda- 
mentals," Vol.  VII.,  pp.  109-110. 

(5)  The  Scriptures  ■  teach  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was" 
raised  from  the  dead.  "Reach  hither  thy  linger,  and  be- 
hold my  hands;  and  reach  hither  thy  hand  and  thrust  it 
into  my  side;  and  be  not  faithless  but  believing."  See 
also  John  20:24-28;  Luke  24:39,  etc.  Shall  we  believe 
Ch'rist,  or  C.  T.  Russell?  Christ  or  the  seller  of  miracle 
wheat  at  $60.00  a  bushel?  "  In  denying  the  bodily  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ,  Russellism  reached  a  pitch  of  extreme  audacity 
and  falsehood.  The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  is  basal  to 
Christianity.  If  Christ  be  not  risen  then  Christians  are  of 
all  men  in  a  most  pitiable  and  deceived  condition.  The 
lie  invented  by  the  chief  priests  that  his  disciples  stole  his 
body  away  during  the  night  while  the  soldiers  slept  is  not 
so  shocking  as  this  baseless  speculation.  Baseless  it  is.  God 
had  predicted  His  resurrection  a  thousand  years  before  it 
occurred  (Ps.  16:9;  Acts  2:26-28).  The  gospel  proof  of 
the  resurrection  is  bomb-proof.  It  was  testified  to  by  a 
large  body  of  disciples,  plain,  competent,  capable  men  who 
had  ample  opportunity  to  ascertain  its  reality,  and  were  of 
honesty  undoubted  which  assures  us  that  they  testified  to 
fact  as  they  saw  it.  (See  "Fundamentals"  VII.,  pp.  115- 
116).  In  his  eft'orts  to  interpret  away  the  Scriptural  teach- 
ing as  to  Christ's  resurrection,  Russell  ignores  the  fact  that 
the  Lord's  resurrection  body,  while  retaining  its  identity, 
was  a  spiritual  body  (I.  Cor.  15:44),  perfectly  adapted  to 
the  Spirit,  and  not  under  the  sway  of  natural  laws  which 
govern  our  ordinary  bodies. 

(6)  Russell  teaches  that  Jesus  Christ  passed  into  non- 
existence on  Golgotha.  Christ  said  to  the  repenting  thief, 
"This  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise.;  If  their 
personalities   became  non-existent   at   death,  they  could   not 


112  Some    Modern    Isms. 

be  together,  for  they  were  not.  Who  was  right?  Jesus  or 
the  man  who  said  under  oath,  in  the  course  of  the  same 
hour,  that  he  knew  the  Greek  language  and  that  he  was 
not  familiar  with  it,  and  who  appeared  devoid  of  ability 
to  name  the  letters  of  the  Greek  alphabet,  on  page  447,  of 
Westcott  and  Hort's  Greek  Testament,  when  asked  to  do 
it  in  court?  More,  the  Christ,  which  now  is,  according  to 
Russellism,  is  a  brand  new  one.  The  other  gone  forever. 
He  was  annihilated. 

(7)  Our  Lord  has  two  natures  and  not  one  as  Russell- 
ism affirms.  We  read  in  John  1:14,  "And  the  Word  be- 
came flesh  and  dwelt  among  us  (and  we  beheld  his  glory, 
the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father),  full  of 
grace  and  truth.  Notice:  (a)  The  Word  became  flesh,  he 
did  not  cease  to  be  God  in  doing  so.  He  was  not  changed 
into  a  man,  a  mere  man.  (b)  He  did  not  cease  to  be  the 
Word,  "He  dwelt  among  us."  The  pronoun  He  has  the 
Word  for  its  antecedent,  (c)  The  term  "dwelt,"  literally  is 
tabernacled,  an  allusion  to  the  tabernacle  of  the  Wilderness. 
God  said,  "And  let  them  make  me  a  sanctuary  that  I  may 
dwell  among  them."  Compare  I  John  1:1-3,  where  John 
summonses  the  three  most  trustworthy  of  our  senses,  hear- 
ing, sight  and  touch,  to  bear  witness  to  the  reality  and  pres- 
ence of  the  Word  of  life,  as  dwelling  among  us. 

See  also  John  16:28.  "I  came  forth  from  the  Father, 
and  am  come  into  the  world:  Again  I  leave  the  world  and 
go  unto  my  Father,"  which  teaches  eternal  son-ship,  sojourn 
in  the  world,  return  to  the  Father,  of  Jesus  Christ. 

See  also  I  Tim.  3:16:  "God  was  manifested  in  the 
flesh,  justified  in  the  Spirit,  seen  of  angels,  believed  on  in 
the  world,  received  up  into  glory." 

(8)  The  doctrine  of  the  extended  Christ  is  a  diabolical 
abolition  of  the  distinction  between  Christ  and  ourselves  as 
Efeneric. 


Some   Modern    Isms.  113 

Russell's  Christology  is  an  impious  jumble,  somewhat  akin 
to  unitarianism,  more  akin  to  Arianism,  but  much  less 
worthy  of  respect  than  either  and  supported  by  an  interpre- 
tation of  Scripture  wholly  arbitrary — a  reading  into  Scrip- 
ture of  notions  foreign  to  it,  that  he  may  fool  the  people. 

5,  Russell's  teaching  concerning  the  Holy  Spirit. 

He  says: 

"This  subject  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  its  office  and  operation, 
has  been  grievously  misunderstood  by  many  of  the  Lord's 
people  for  centuries:  and  only  in  the  light  of  the  rising;  Sun 
of  Righteousness — in  the  light  of  the  parousia  of  the  Son  of 
Man — is  this  subject  becoming  thoroughly  clear  and  reas- 
onable, as  it  evidently  was  to  the  early  Church,  and  in 
harmony  with  all  the  various  Scriptural  testimonies  pertain- 
ing to  it.     .      .     . 

"There  is  consistency  in  the  Scripture  teaching  that  the 
Father  and  the  Son  are  in  full  harmony  and  oneness  of 
purpose  and  operation,  as  we  have  just  seen.  And  equally 
consistent  is  the  Scripture  teaching  respecting  the  Holy 
Spirit — that  it  is  not  another  God,  but  the  spirit  influence 
or  power  exercised  by  the  one  God,  our  Father,  and  by  his 
only  Begotten  Son — in  absolute  oneness,  therefore,  with  both 
of  these,  who  also  are  at  one  or  in  full  accord.  But  how 
different  is  this  unity  of  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  from  that  held  and  taught  under  the  name  of  Trini- 
tarian doctrine,  which  in  the  language  of  the  Catechism 
(Questions  5  and  6),  declares:  "There  are  three  persons 
in  the  one  God,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost: 
These  three  are  one  God,  the  same  in  substance,  equal  in 
power  and  glory."  This  view  suited  well  'the  dark  ages' 
which  it  helped  to  produce.  The  period  in  which  mysteries 
were  worshipped  instead  of  unravelled,  found  a  most  choice 
one  in  this  theory,  which  is  as  unscriptural  as  it  is  un- 
reasonable.   How  could  the  three  be  one  person,  in  substance? 


114  SoiME    Modern    Isms. 

And  if  'one  in  substance,'  how  could  they  be  equal?  Does 
not  every  intelligent  person  know  that  if  God  is  one  in  per- 
son, he  cannot  be  three?  and  that  if  three  in  person  there 
can  be  only  one  sense  in  which  the  three  could  be  07te, 
and  that  not  in  person  but  in  purpose,  in  mind,  in  will,  in 
co-operation?  Verily,  if  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that  this 
trinitarian  nonsense  was  drilled  into  us  from  our  earliest 
infancy,  and  the  fact  that  it  is  soberly  taught  in  Theologi- 
cal Seminaries  by  gray  haired  professors,  in  many  other 
ways  apparently  wise,  nobody  would  give  it  a  moment's  con- 
sideration."   Vol.  5,  pp.  165-166. 

"It  is  impossible  to  harmonize  these  various  statements" 
(The  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  etc.),  with  the  ordinary  idea  of  a 
third  God."    Vol.  5,  p.  168. 

"In  the  light  of  the  Scripture  we  may  understand  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  mean: 

(a)  God's  power  exercised  in  any  manner,  but  always  ac- 
cording to  lines  of  justice  and  love,  and  hence  always  a 
holy   power. 

(b)  This  power  may  be  an  energy  of  life,  a  physically 
creative  power,  or  a  power  of  thought,  creating  and  inspir- 
ing thoughts  and  words,  or  a  quickening  life-giving  power, 
as  it  was  manifested  in  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord,  and 
will  again  be  manifested  in  the  resurrection  of  the  Church, 
his  body. 

(c)  "The  begetting  or  transforming  power  or  influence  of 
the  knowledge  of  the  Truth."    Vol.  5,  p.  183. 

"It  would  be  strange  indeed  if  one  member  of  a  co-equal 
Trinity  of  equal  gods  referred  to  another  as  able  and  willing 
to  give  the  third  as  earthly  parents  are  to  give  bread,  fish 
and  eggs  to  their  children."    Vol.  5,  p.  224. 

In  these  passages  Russell  betrays  anew  his  misconception 
of,  or  his  caricaturing,  of  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity.  He 
speaks  as  if  Trinitarians  were  Tritheists — as  if  they  held 


Some    Modern    Isms.  115 

that  the  several  persons  of  the  Godhead  were  related  as  three 
individual  men  are  related,  as  if  they  were  three  individual 
beings,  with  substance  the  same  in  kind.  Whereas  the  Trini- 
tarian holds  that  the  one  substance  of  the  deity  exists  in  a 
three- fold  mode — which  modes  are  more  nearly  like  that  of 
personality  in  man  than  anything  else  with  which  man  has 
to  compare  them.  Hear  the  clear  statement:  "There  are 
three  persons  in  the  Godhead,  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  these  three  are  one  God,  the  same  in  sub- 
stance, equal  in  power  and  glory." 

That  the  Holy  Spirit  is  represented  as  personal,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  as  divine,  is 
the  clear  teaching  of  the  word.  The  Scriptures  say  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  "teaches"  and  "reveals,"  John  14:26;  I 
Cor.  2:13;  John  15:25,  26;  I  Tim.  4:1;  that  He  searches 
the  decrees  of  God,  I  Cor.  2:10;  that  He  calls  to  special 
work  in  the  Church,  to  special  work  in  the  ministry.  Acts 
13:2;  that  he  distributes  gifts  as  He  will,  I  Cor.  12:10; 
and  exercises  many  other  personal  agencies;  that  He  exer- 
cises the  active  feelings  of  a  person,  Eph.  4:30.  Scripture 
distinguishes  Him  alike  from  Father  and  Son  and  represents 
Him  as  sharing  in  honors  and  acts  undoubtedly  personal  to 
them.  Matt.  28:19;  2  Cor.  13:14.  Pneuma  though  neuter, 
is  construed  with  a  masculine  pronoun,  John  16:3.  He  is 
irepresented  as  lied  to,  and  therefore  as  personal,  Acts  5:3. 
These  are  but  a  few  of  the  indications  of  his  personality. 
They  suffice. 

His  Divinity  is  so  clearly  set  forth  that  Russell  does  not 
question  that,  only  endeavoring  to  show  that  he  is  a  Divine 
influence. 

The  subordination  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  that  of 
the  Son  is  evidently  that  of  economy.  The  three  modes  of 
the  divine  existence — three  persons — are  to  be  treated  each 
with  the  same  honor.     They  are  therefore  equal  in  honor, 


116  So^tE    Modern    Isms. 

though  subordinating  themselves  in  a  given  order  in  the 
outworking  and  application  of  redemption. 

2d.   The  plan  of  God. 

Russell  teaches  that  God  planned  three  great  dispensa- 
tions: The  first  "lasting  from  man's  creation  to  the  flood, 
1656  years;  the  second,  from  the  flood  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  millennial  reign  of  Christ,  at  his  second  ad- 
vent, 4344;*  and  the  third,  or  "Dispensation  of  the  Fulness 
of  Times,'  lasting  from  the  beginning  of  Christ's  reign  for 
'ages  to  come'."     Vol.  1,  p.  219. 

He  teaches  that,  in  each  of  these  three  dispensations,  "God's 
plan  with  reference  to  men  has  a  distinct  and  separate  out- 
line;" that  "the  dispensation  before  the  flood  was  under  the 
supervision  and  special  ministration  of  angels,  who  were 
permitted  to  try  what  they  could  do  to  recover  the  fallen 
and  degenerate  race."  Vol.  1,  p.  220.  That  during  the 
second  dispensation,  'the  present  evil  world,'  up  to  1874,  man 
was  permitted  to  try  governing  himself;  but  by  reason  of 
the  fall  he  was  under  the  control  of  Satan,  the  "prince  of 
this  world;"  that  "this  dispensation  was  to  end  in  the  great- 
est time  of  trouble  the  world  ever  saw;"  that  this  dispensa- 
tion was  composed  of  three  distinct  ages;  the  age  of  the 
patriarchs  from  the  flood  to  the  death  of  Jacob;  the  Jewish 
age,  and  the  Gospel  age;  that  in  this  gospel  age,  "We  had 
the  'royal  priesthood,'  composed  of  all  those  who  offered  them- 
.selves  to  God,"  living  sacrifices,  'holy  and  acceptable  through 
Jesus  Christ,"  that  during  this  period  "the  body  of  Christ 
was  called  out  of  the  world,  and  shown  ...  the  ex- 
ceeding great  and  precious  promises  whereby  (by  obedience 
to  the  call  and  its  requirements)  they  might  become  partak- 
ers of  the  divine  nature."  Vol.  1,  pp.  221-22.  That  'the 
third  great  dispensation  is  to  be  composed  of  many  ages,' 
that  the  first  of  these  is  the  Millennial  age;  that  "it  is  the 


^This   dispensation   ended    in    1874. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  117 

thousand  years  during  which  Christ  will  reign  over  and 
thereby  bless  all  the  families  of  the  earth,  accomplishing 
the  restitution  of  all  things  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  all  the 
holy  prophets.  During  that  age,  sin  and  death  shall  be 
forever  blotted  out."     Vol.   1,  p.  222. 

"The  ages  to  come  following  the  great  reconstruction 
period,  are  to  be  ages  of  perfection,  blessedness  and  happi- 
ness, regarding  the  work  of  which  the  Scriptures  are  silent." 
Vol.  1,  p.  223. 

"Each  of  these  dispensations  has  its  distinct  seasons  for 
the  beginning  and  development  of  its  work,  and  each  ends 
with  a  harvest  manifesting  its  fruits.  The  harvest  at  the 
close  of  the  Jewish  age  was  a  period  of  forty  years,  lasting 
from  the  beginning  of  Jesus'  ministry.  ...  A.  D.  29, 
until  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  70.    Vol.  1,  p.  223. 

"x\  harvest  constitutes  the  closing  period  of  the  Gospel 
age  also,  during  which  there  is  again  a  lapping  of  the 
two  ages — the  Gospel  age  ending,  and  the  Restitution  or 
Millennial  age  beginning.  The  Gospel  age  closes  by  stages, 
as  did  its  pattern  or  'shadow,'  the  Jewish  age.  As  then, 
the  first  seven  years  of  the  harvest  were  devoted  in  a  special 
sense  to  a  w^ork  in  and  for  Israel  after  the  flesh,  and  were 
years  of  favor,  so  here  we  find  a  similar  seven  years  indi- 
cated as  having  the  same  bearing  upon  the  Gospel  Church, 
to  be  followed  by  a  period  of  trouble  (fire)  upon  the  world 
as  a  punishment  for  wickedness,  and  a  preparation  for  the 
reign  of  righteousness."     Vol.  I,  p.  224. 

He  teaches  that  God  planned  that  during  the  Jewish  age 
some  persons  might  avail  themselves  of  God's  overtures  of 
mercy  and  win  for  themselves,  the  title  to  recreation  in 
the  millennial  age,  as  perfect  human  beings;  that  God  planned 
that  a  few  persons  in  the  Gospel  age,  through  faith  and  the 
sacrifice  of  their  human  lives,  might  w^in  the  title  to  a  call 
into  spiritual  existence  and  elevation  to  the   Divine  nature 


118  Some   Modern   Isms. 

in  the  millennial  age;  that  in  the  Millennial  age  all  the 
hosts  of  those  who  have  died  shall  be  "resurrected"  (created) 
and  given  a  trial  full  and  sufficient,  when,  if  they  choose 
to  serve  Christ,  they  shall  be  made  perfect  with  the  perfec- 
tion with  which  Adam  started.     (See  Vol.  2.) 

He  says,  "Let  us  not  be  misunderstood.  We  have  hereto- 
fore shown  that  God's  plan  does  not  extend  to  the  con- 
verting of  the  world  during  the  Gospel  Age.  He  did  not 
intend  to  do  so,  but  merely  designed  the  selection  and  trial 
of  the  Church  now,  and  the  blessing  of  the  world  through 
the  Church,  the  Christ,  in  an  age  to  follow  this.  We  do  not 
contradict  this  when  we  say  that  the  Elijah  (Christ  in  the 
flesh),  has  tried  to  convert  the  world  and  failed 
for  though  God  knew  and  foretold  that  our  mission  to  the 
world  would  be  largely  a  failure,  except  in  selecting  of  a 
choice  little  flock,  yet  knowing  that  the  effort  would  react 
favorably  upon  ourselves,  his  commission  to  us  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  to  try  to  convert  the  world,  when 
he  said,  'Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  good 
tidings  to  every  creature'."     Vol.  2,  p.  252. 

He  says  with  regard  to  election  and  free  grace: 

"If  the  distinctive  features  of  the  epochs  and  dispensa- 
tions outlined  in  a  preceeding  chapter  be  kept  in  mind,  and 
all  the  passages  relating  to  election  and  free  grace  be  ex- 
amined and  located,  it  will  be  found  that  all  those  which 
treat  of  election  apply  to  the  present.  (Gospel  and  past  ages, 
while  those  which  teach  Free  Grace  are  fully  applicable  to 
the  next  age." 

"Since  the  fall  of  man  into  sin,  to  the  present  time,  cer- 
tain of  God's  favors  have  been  restricted  to  specify  indi- 
viduals, nations  and  classes,  while  in  the  next  age  all  the 
world  will  be  invited  to  share  the  favors  then  offered,  then 
made  known  to  all,  and  whosoever  will  may  come  and  drink 
at  life's  fountain  freely."    Vol.  1,  pp.  96,  97. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  119 

"That  the  Christian  Church,  the  body  of  Christ,  is  an 
exception  to  God's  general  plan  for  mankind,  is  evident  from 
the  statement  that  its  selection  was  detennined  in  the  divine 
plan  before  the  foundation  of  the  world  (Eph.  1:4,  5),  at 
which  time  God  not  only  foresaw  the  fall  of  the  race  into 
sin,  but  also  predetermined  the  justification,  the  sanctifica- 
tion  and  the  glorification  of  this  class,  which  during  the 
Gospel  age,  he  has  been  calling  out  of  the  world  to  be  con- 
formed to  the  image  of  his  Son,  to  be  partakers  of  the 
divine  nature  and  to  be  fellow  heirs  with  Jesus  Christ  of 
the  Millennial  Kingdom  for  the  establishment  of  universal 
righteousness  and  peace." 

"This  shows  that  the  election,  or  choice,  of  the  Church 
was  a  pre-determined  thing  on  God's  part:  but  mark,  it  is 
not  an  unconditional  election  of  the  individual  members  of 
the  Church.  Before  the  foundation  of  the  world  God  de- 
termined that  such  a  company  should  be  selected  for  such 
a  purpose  within  a  specific  time — the  Gospel  Age.  While 
we  cannot  doubt  that  God  could  have  foreseen  the  action  of 
each  individual  member  of  the  Church,  and  could  have  fore- 
known just  who  would  be  worthy  and  therefore  constitute 
the  members  of  that  'little  flock,'  yet  this  is  not  the  way 
in  which  God's  word  presents  the  doctrine  of  election.  It 
was  not  the  thought  of  an  individual  predestination  which 
the  Apostles  sought  to  inculcate,  but  that  a  class  was  pre- 
destined in  God's  purpose  to  fill  the  honorable  position,  the 
selection  of  which  would  be  upon  conditions  of  severe  trials 
of  faith  and  obedience  and  the  sacrifice  of  earthly  privileges 
even  unto  death.  Thus  by  an  individual  trial,  and  by  in- 
dividually 'overcoming'  the  individual  members  of  the  pre- 
determined class  are  being  chosen  or  accepted  into  all  bless- 
ings and  benefits  predetermined  of  God  for  this  class." 

"In  selecting  the  little  flock,  God  makes  a  very  general 
call — ^manv  are  called."     .      .      .       "But  even  of  those  who 


120  Some   Modern    Isms. 

hear  and  come,  all  are  not  worthy.  Wedding  garments  are 
provided,  but  some  will  not  wear  them,  and  must  be  re- 
jected; and  of  those  who  do  put  on  the  robes  of  justifica- 
tion, and  who  receive  the  honor  of  being  begotten  to  a  new- 
nature,  some  fail  to  make  their  calling  and  election  sure 
by  faithfulness  to  their  covenant."  (Vol.  1,  pp.  193-195). 
According  to  this  plan,  Jesus,  Russell  teaches,  was  to  be- 
come present  (spiritually)  October,  1874;  "Israel  after  the 
Spirit"  was  to  obtain  from  the  death  of  Jesus  till  1878;  her 
period  of  favor  was  thus  to  cover  1845  years;  the  nominal 
house  of  Sons,  or  the  Christian  Church,  was  then  to  be 
spewed  out,  in  A.  D.,  1878;  she  was  to  be  thirty-seven  years 
in  falling,  and  was  to  fall  in  1915,  the  end  of  an  age  of 
harvest  of  40  years — a  harvest  extending  from  the  year  1874 
to  the  end  of  1914,  or  to  1915.    Vol.  2,  pp.  246,  247. 

Here,  again,  the  statement  of  this  plan  of  the  modes  of 
the  dispensation,  of  how  God  related  himself  to  the  world 
in  the  several  ages,  should  be  enough  to  kill  it.  But,  ex 
abundantia  a  few  weaknesses  may  be  pointed  out. 

1st.  Russell's  teaching  that,  in  the  first  dispensation,  God 
let  the  angels  see  what  they  could  do  toward  man's  recovery, 
is  a  vain  dream  of  his.  The  Scriptures  which  he  cites  in 
support  of  this  teaching  are  Job  38:7,  which  tells  of  the 
joy  of  the  angels  at  the  creation  of  the  lower  universe;  and 
Heb.  2:5,  "Unto  the  angels  hath  he  not  put  in  subjection 
the  world  to  come."  If  from  the  assertion,  that  God  hath 
not  subjected  the  world  to  come  to  angels,  there  be  a  legiti- 
mate inference  that  he  hath  subjected  a  certain  other  world 
to  angels,  it  is  that  he  hath  subjected  the  world  of  the 
Jewish  age  to  angels.  For  in  the  context  we  are  taught 
that  he  had  promulgated  the  law  through  them;  and  in 
the  context  it  is  precisely  a  contrast  between  the  Mosaic 
dispensation  and  the  Christian  dispensation  that  the  Apostle 
means,  and  not  a  contrast  between  the  Antediluvian  and 
later  ages. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  121 

2d.  Russell's  teaching  that  God  does  not  intend  the  con- 
version of  the  world  in  the  Gospel  age — that  he  intends 
that  in  the  Millennial  age;  that  Christ  commissioned  the 
Church  not  to  convert  world  in  the  Gospel  age — but  to  try 
to  convert  it  in  that  age,  is  supported  by  the  kind  of  eisegesis 
that  permits  and  exacts  the  gratuitous  interpolation  of  the 
word  try  into  the  very  language  of  the  great  commission. 
In  that  commission  Christ  said:  "Go  ye,  therefore,  and 
make  disciples  of  all  nations;"  and,  to  guarantee  success  in 
that  effort,  Christ,  to  whom  all  authority  in  heaven  and 
earth  had  been  given,  added,  "Lo,  I  am  with  you  always, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  It  is  supported  also  by 
an  eisegesis  that  turns  Christ's  visible  coming  into  an  invisi- 
ble coming;  and  by  an  eisegesis  which  represents  Christ  as 
having  thus  come  in  1874,  as  having  assumed  the  power 
and  title  of  king  in  1878,  and  as  having  accomplished  utter- 
ly the  destruction  of  the  nominal  Christian  Church  in  the 
next  "thirty-seven  years,"  or  in  1915.     Vol.  2,  p.  247. 

3d.  Russell's  teaching  that  God  has  planned  to  restore, 
in  the  Millennial  age,  all  men  who  have  not  in  previous 
ages  accepted  Christ,  to  the  perfection  of  nature  with  w^hich 
Adam  was  naturally  endowed,  is  supported  with  similar 
eisegesis,  and  with  utter  disregard  both  of  God's  sanity  and 
of  the  havoc  such  teaching,  if  believed,  would  make  of  men's 
morals:  No  sane  ruler,  wishing  his  righteous  laws  obeyed, 
would  advertise  to  his  subjects  that  the  only  penalty  of  sin 
would  be  temporary  annihilation,  coupled  with  a  recall  into 
existence  and  a  new  period  of  probation  vastly  more  favor- 
able. No  righteous  ruler  would  hold  such  a  prospect  out 
before  sinful  men;  and  so  encourage  universal  license  in  a 
race  set  in  sin.  But,  more,  the  Bible  teaches  nothing  of  a 
salvation  which  shall  result  in  the  status  of  Adamic  per- 
fection. It  teaches  only  of  a  salvation  to  the  life  which  is 
life — heirship   with   Christ   to  eternal   glory. 


122  Some    Modern    Isms. 

4th.  Russell  minimizes  the  number  of  the  saved  in  the 
Gospel  age,  by  stressing  isolated  texts.  It  is  with  him  al- 
ways the  "little  flock"  that  is  saved.  Now,  the  Bible  does 
not  teach  that  every  man  is  to  be  saved,  but  it  does  teach 
that  a  great  multitude  that  no  man  can  number  is  to  be 
saved;  that  a  number  so  vast  as  to  justify  our  Lord  in 
saying,  "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw 
all  men  unto  me." 

5th.  Russell's  teaching  that  there  is  a  future  probation 
for  all  who  do  not  accept  Christ  in  the  Gospel  age  is  with- 
out Biblical  warrant,  or  any  warrant  in  reason.  He  has  no 
more  evidence  from  either  source  than  the  average  assertor 
of  future  probation,  which  in  the  face  of  Scripture  teaching 
is  nil.  In  2  Cor.  5:10,  for  example,  "For  we  must  all  ap- 
pear before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ;  that  every  one 
may  receive  the  things  done  in  the  body,  according  to  that 
he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad,"  we  are  taught 
that  in  the  great  award  the  things  done  here  and  now  are 
determinative  of  our  future.  In  2  Cor.  6:2,  "Now  is  the 
day  of  salvation;  behold  now  (in  the  Gospel  Age),  is 
the  day  of  salvation,"  the  same  truth  is  reiterated.  So  also 
in  Matt.  28:19,  20,  in  connection  with  Matt  24:3,  6,  14. 
Many  other  passages  show  that  the  time  of  salvation  is 
now,  till  the  end  of  the  world — till  Christ's  second  coming. 

6th,  Russell's  teaching  that  election  is  not  of  individuals 
but  of  classes,  is  a  form  of  Pelagianism;  and  is  refuted  by 
the  usual  arguments  against  Pelagianism,  e.  g.,  by  the 
fact  that  Scriptural  language  shows  that  individuals  not 
classes  possessing  given  characteristics  were  elected  to  sal- 
vation.    See  Rom.  8:29,  ff.,  et  passim. 

In  identifying  election  with  "acceptance  into  all  blessings 
and  benefits  predetermined  of  God  for  this  class,"  the  bald- 
ness of  his  Pelagianism  appears. 

7th.  In  teaching  the  doctrine  of  falling  from  justification, 
Russell  follows  the  Pelagian  error. 


SoiME    Modern    Isms.  123 

8th.  The  facts  of  history  as  well  as  the  teachings  of  Scrip- 
ture show  to  be  false  the  dates  which  Russell  fixes  upon 
for  the  coming  of  Christ  and  Christ's  spewing  out  the  Church 
and  the  utter  collapse  of  the  Church. 

3d.  RusselVs  Doctrine  of  Creation. 

He  seems  to  reduce  creation  to  formation;  at  least,  to  be 
unwilling  to  teach  de  nihilo  creation.  He  says,  "The  wise 
will  not  attempt  to  guess  that  which  God  has  not  revealed 
respecting  how  he  previously  gathered  together  earth's 
atoms.''  Vol.  6,  p.  23.  He  teaches  that  a  personal  God 
framed  "the  universe,  man  excepted,  out  of  these  atoms, 
probably  by  a  method  of  evolution.  He  teaches  that  "man 
was  a  direct  and  perfect  creation"  (Vol.  1,  p.  32);  but  by 
this  creation  he  seems  to  mean  nothing  more  than  formation 
of  his  body  out  of  earthy  particles  and  vivifying  it  with 
the  breath  of  life,  i.  e.,  with  that  vitality  (as  he  explains), 
that  man  shares  along  with  the  lower  animals. 

Here  the  author  intermingles  senile  dreams  with  nonsense, 
which  he  reads  into  the  word  of  God  in  order  to  support  his 
theory. 

4th.  Russell's  doctrine  of  providence  resembles  as  far  as 
his  peculiar  crotchets  allow,  the  Semi-Pelagian  view,  and 
therefore,  calls  for  no  specific  representation  or  refutation, 
that  having  been  done  in  the  regular  course  in  theology. 

II.  RiisselVs  Anthropology;  or  Doctrine  of  Man's  Origin, 
Constitution,  Soul,  Original  Moral  Character,  Fall,  Sin,  Pen- 
alty, Destiny. 

1.  As  has  just  been  shown,  Russell  teaches  that  God  cre- 
ated (formed)  man  by  an  immediate  exertion  of  his  own 
power,  as  the  crown  of  material  creation. 

2.  He  teaches  that  man  consists  of  body  and  the  spirit 
of  life;  that  man's  body  is  the  most  perfect  of  animal  or- 
ganisms; and  that  the  spirit  is  simply  vital,  animal  energy. 
Thus  he  says: 


124  Some    Modern    Isms. 

"Man's  superiority  over  the  beast,  according  to  the  ac- 
count given  in  Genesis,  consists  not  in  his  having  a  different 
kind  of  breath  or  spirit,  but  in  his  having  a  higher  form, 
a  superior  body,  a  finer  organism — endowed  with  a  brain 
organism  which  enables  him  to  reason  upon  planes  far  above 
and  beyond  the  intelligence  of  the  lower  animals,  the  brute 
creation.  We  find  that  in  these  respects  man  was  created 
a  fleshly  likeness  of  his  Creator,  who  is  a  Spirit  being.'' 
Vol.  5,  p.  310. 

"But  as  we  have  found,  and  as  all  men  are  witnesses, 
each  has  a  different  bodily  organism  which  gives  to  each 
his  different  characteristics,  and  which  alone  constitutes  one 
higher  and  the  other  lower  in  the  scale  of  intelligence." 
Vol.  5,  p.  327. 

In  support  of  these  teachings,  he  quotes  amongst  other 
passage,  Eccles.  3:21,  "Who  knoweth  the  spirit  of  man 
whether  it  goeth  upward?"  He  endeavors  to  break  the 
force  of  Eccles.  12:7,  "The  dust  returneth  to  the  earth  as 
it  was,  and  the  spirit  returneth  to  God  who  gave  it,"  by 
making  spirit  to  mean  "the  privilege  of  living  the  power  or 
permission  of  living."  But,  in  the  5th  verse,  the  writer 
says,  "because  man  goeth  to  his  everlasting  home."  How 
can  man  be  said  to  go  to  his  everlasting  home,  if  his  body 
goes  back  to  the  dust  and  his  spirit  is  nothing  but  "per- 
mission to  live."  In  that  case  man  is  not.  He  has  no  home. 
He  has  become  non-existent. 

3.  He  teaches  that  the  soul  of  man  is  a  resultant  quality 
or  condition  from  the  injection  of  spirit  (vital  energy)  into 
the  body;  that  a  soul  is  a  sentient  being.     He  says: 

"Examining  this  question  from  the  Bible  standpoint,  we 
will  find  that  man  has  a  body  and  has  a  spirit  ('vital  force,') 
but  is  a  soul.  Science  concurs  with  the  Scriptures  in  this. 
Indeed,  one  of  the  sciences,  Phrenology,  undertakes  to  treat 
the  skulls  and  lower  animals  as  indexes  and  to  read  there- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  125 

from    the    natural    traits    and    characteristics    of    the    own- 
ers."    .      .      . 

"The  word  'soul'  as  found  in  the  Scriptures,  signifies 
sentient  being;  that  is  a  being  possessed  of  powers  of  sense, 
sense-perception.  Witli  minds  freed  from  prejudice,  let  us 
go  with  this  definition  to  the  Genesis  account  of  man's  cre- 
ation, and  note  that  (1)  the  organism,  or  body,  was  formed; 
(2)  'the  spirit  of  life,'  'called  Breath  of  life,'  was  communi- 
cated, (3)  living  soul,  or  sentient  being  resulted.  This  is 
very  simple  and  easily  understood.  It  shows  that  the  body 
is  not  the  soul,  nor  is  the  spirit  or  breath  of  life  the  soul; 
but  that  when  these  two  were  united,  the  resultant  quality, 
or  condition,  was  living  man,  living  being — a  living  soul, 
possessed  of  perceptive  powers."  Vol.  5,  pp.  322-323. 

Over  against  this:  (1)  Set  the  words  of  our  Lord.  "Fear 
not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the 
soul;  but  rather  fear  him,  which  is  able  to  destroy  both 
soul  and  body  in  hell."  Matt.  10:28.  Such  is  the  common 
representation  in  Scriptures.  The  body  and  soul  are  set 
forth  as  distinct  substances;  Christ  also  represents  Dives  and 
Lazarus  as  living  in  the  unseen  world.  Their  bodies  were 
in  the  grave.  (2)  There  is  another  class  of  passages  which 
equally  refutes  this  point  in  Russellism.  These  passages 
represent  the  body  as  a  garment  which  is  to  be  laid  aside — a 
house  in  which  the  soul  dwells.  Peter  says  that  he  "must 
shortly  put  off  this  tabernacle."  Paul  says,  "If  our  earthly 
house  of  this  tabernacle  were  dissolved,  we  have  a  building 
of  God,"  2  Cor.  5:1-9;  and  in  the  same  connection  he  speaks 
of  being  unclothed  and  clothed  upon  with  our  house  which 
is  from  heaven. 

^^hiie  soul  is  often  used  in  Scripture  with  special  refer- 
ence to  man's  sensuous  and  perceptive  faculties,  and  spirit 
is  often  used  with  special  reference  to  his  higher  faculties. 
the  words  are  often  used  as  equivalent  and  of  a  substance 


126  Some   Modern    Isms. 

and  not  of  a  mere  vital  energy,  albeit  the  substance  is  quali- 
fied with  vital  energy,  of  a  kind. 

4.  Russell  teaches  that  man  was  good — morally  good — as 
he  came  originally  from  the  hands  of  God.  He  apparently 
holds  a  position  as  close  to  the  Wesleyan  Arminians  as  his 
crochets  will  allow  on  this  point. 

5.  With  regard  to  the  Fall,  Russell  teaches  the  fact  of 
it  as  well  as  the  morally  excellent  character  of  Adam  prior 
to  the  fall,  in  the  following  words: 

"Mental  and  physical  perfection,  under  the  conditions  pre- 
sented in  the  divine  account  of  the  creation,  clearly  and 
positively  imply  moral  perfection;  for  we  are  to  remember 
that,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  moral  obliquity  and  con- 
sequent degradation  had  not  set  in.  Nor  is  it  supposable 
that  man,  without  moral  elements  to  his  mental  develop- 
ment, would  be  described  in  the  Scriptures  as  a  "very  good" 
man,  or  as  an  image  of  his  Creator."     . 

"The  death  sentence,  or  'curse,'  pronounced  against  Adam, 
viz.:  'Dying  thou  shalt  die'  (Gen.  2:17,  margin),  was  not 
merely  against  his  muscles  and  physical  frame — it  included 
the  entire  man,  the  mental  as  well  as  the  physical;  and  this 
also  included  the  moral  qualities,  because  they  are  a  part 
of  the  mental.  It  is  in  full  confirmation  of  this  that  we 
see  today  that  man  is  a  fallen  being  in  every  sense  of  the 
word.  Physically  he  is  degenerated,  and  his  average  of  life 
has  fallen,  under  most  favorable  conditions,  to  thirty-three 
years;  mentally  and  morally  we  also  see  that  he  is  very 
deficient,  yet  possessing  organs  capable  of  much  higher  de- 
velopment than  his  short  life  will  permit."   Vol.  5,  p.  407. 

To  one  who  is  sufficiently  superficial  this  quotation  may 
appear  to  be  a  simple,  pious  statement  of  the  teaching  of 
the  Scriptures  on  the  subject;  but  let  him  begin  to  think, 
and  it  will  appear  unworthy  of  respect.  What  right  has 
Russell   to  contrast   in   these  words  the    physical    and    the 


Some    Modern    Isms.  127 

mental,  since  he  teaches  that  man  consists  simply  of  matter 
organized  in  given  ways  and  vital,  animal  energy.  For 
that  is  physical  too,  only  physical  according  to  Russell. 

6.  Russell  falsely  resolves  sin  into  that  which  produces 
unhappiness.  Thus  he  says:  "We  distinguish  these  op- 
posite principles  of  right  and  wrong  by  their  effects  when 
put  into  action.  That  principle  which,  when  active,  is  bene- 
ficial and  productive  of  ultimate  order,  harmony  and  happi- 
ness we  call  a  right  principle;  and  the  opposite,  which  is 
productive  of  discord,  unhappiness  and  destruction,  we  call 
a  wrong  principle.  The  results  of  these  principles  in  action 
we  call  good  and  evil,  and  the  intelligent  being,  capable  of 
discerning  the  right  principle  from  the  wrong,  and  volun- 
tarily governed  by  the  one  or  the  other,  we  call  virtuous  or 
sinful."    Vol.   1,  pp.   118,  119. 

A  peculiarity  of  his  doctrine  of  sin  is  his  representing  it 
as  an  "asset"  for  all  those  who  are  not  received  into  the 
"little  flock."  He  tells  us  that  in  the  millennium  all  those 
who  have  not  been  received  into  this  body  shall  be  called 
into  existence  ("resurrected")  and  given  a  new  trial;  where- 
upon he  says:  "The  experience  with  evil,  contrasted  w'ith 
the  experience  with  good,  which  will  come  to  each  during 
the  trial  of  the  coming  age,  will  constitute  the  advantage 
by  reason  of  which  the  results  of  the  second  trial  will  differ 
so  widely  from  the  results  of  the  first."  Vol.  1,  p.  151. 

Teach  this  doctrine  to  men  and  women — of  unrenewed 
hearts — teach  them  that  sin  is  a  "valuable  asset" — no  matter 
what  sort  of  sin — teach  this  doctrine  along  with  Russell's 
doctrine  that  death  is  going  into  non-existence — that  it  in- 
volves the  saint  and  the  sinner  in  exactly  the  same  penalty, 
and  you  will  incite  those  so  taught  toward  the  grossest  wick- 
edness. 

7.  Of  the  penalty  of  sin,  Russell  writes: 

"It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  it  is  not  the  pain 


128  Some   Modern    Isms. 

and  suffering  in  dying,  but  death — the  extinction  of  life — in 
which  dying  culminates,  that  is  the  penalty  of  sin.  The 
suffering  is  only  incidental  to  it,  and  the  penalty  falls  on 
many  with  but  little  or  no  suffering.  ...  In  the 
penalty  pronounced  there  was  no  intimation  of  rel^ease. 
(Gen.  2:17).     Vol.  1,  p.  154. 

"What,  then,  dies?  We  answer  that  it  is  the  soul  that 
dies — the  sentient  being  ceases.  Let  us  remember  that  the 
sentient  being  was  produced  by  the  union  of  the  breath,  or 
spirit  of  life,  with  an  organism,  and  that  the  dissolution,  or 
separation,  of  these  two  causes  the  cessation  of  being  the 
soul — death.  That  this  is  true  of  the  lower  animals,  none 
would  for  a  moment  question;  but  is  it  not  equally  true  of 
man,  the  highest  animal,  created  in  the  intellectual  image 
and  moral  likeness  of  God?"  Vol.  5,  p.  341. 

Remark : 

This  is  utterly  unbiblical.  We  read  in  that  book  that 
Abraham  "died  in  a  good  old  age  .  .  .  and  was  gath- 
ered to  his  father."  A  little  later  we  read  that  his  sons 
"buried  him  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah.  Gen.  25:8,  9.  His 
people  were  not  buried  "in  the  cave  of  Machpelah;  he  while 
buried  there,  was  gathered  unto  his  fathers."  The  meaning 
must  be  that  he  was  buried  as  to  his  body  in  Machpelah 
and  gathered  as  to  his  soul  to  his  fathers.  His  soul  survived 
the  shock  of  death.  So  Samuel  is  represented  as  surviving 
the  shock  of  death.  He  came  up  at  the  interview  of  Saul 
with  the  witch  of  Endor.  I  Sam.   29:15. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  represents  Abraham,  a  dead  beggar, 
Lazarus,  and  a  rich  man  as  all  existing  in  Hades — Abraham 
and  Lazarus  as  in  one  portion  of  Hades  and  Dives  as  in 
another  portion.  Our  Lord  teaches  of  the  rich  man  that  lie 
survived  and  suffered,  of  Abraham  and  Lazarus,  that  they 
survived  and  were  happy. 

The  Apostle  John,  saw.  Rev.  6.,  the  souls  of  multitudes 


Some    Modern    Isms.  129 

who  had  been  beheaded  in  the  great  transgression,  existing 
and  full  of  activity.     See  also  2  Cor.  5:1-9;  Phil.  1:23. 

In  addition,  the  absolute  unity  and  indivisibility  of  the 
substance  of  the  soul  to  which  a  sound  philosophy  points 
would  seem  to  show  that  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as 
the  extinction  of  the  soul. 

Russell's  teaching  that  suffering  is  no  part  of  the  pen- 
alty due  to  sin  is  shown  to  be  false  by  the  language  of  the 
curse  pronounced  up  the  first  pair.  Gen.  3:16-19.  The 
ills  of  the  sinner's  life  are  but  stages  in  his  dying.  Rus- 
sell's teaching  that  an  organism  may  not  have  life,  is  con- 
trary to  the  fact.  It  is  always  a  living  thing.  It  is  growth 
regulated  by  a  vital  principle.  Let  that  principle  depart 
and  the  remains  begin  to  fall  to  pieces. 

8.  Russell  teaches  of  man's  destiny  as  follows: 

"Paul  says  that  the  first  man  (who  was  a  sample  of 
what  the  race  will  be  when  perfect)  was  of  the  earth, 
earthy;  and  his  posterity,  with  the  exception  of  the  Gospel 
Church,  will  in  the  resurrection,  still  be  earthy,  human, 
adapted  to  the  earth  (1.  Cor.  15:38,  44.)     Vol.  1,  p.  191. 

"While  Jesus  as  a  man  was  an  illustration  of  perfect 
human  nature,  to  which  the  mass  of  mankind  will  be  re- 
stored, yet  since  his  resurrection  he  is  the  illustration  of 
the  glorious  divine  nature,  which  the  overcoming  Church 
will,  at  the  resurrection,  share  with  him. 

"Because  the  present  age  is  devoted  mainly  to  the  develop- 
ment of  this  class  which  is  offered  a  change  of  nautre,  and 
because  the  apostolic  epistles  are  devoted  to  the  instruction 
of  this  "little  flock",  it  should  not  be  inferred  that  God's 
plans  end  with  the  completion  of  this  chosen  compan}'. 
Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  should  we  go  to  the  opposite  ex- 
treme, and  suppose  the  promises  of  the  divine  nature,  spirit- 
ual promises,  etc.,  made  to  these,  are  God's  design  for  all 
mankind.     To  these  are  the  "exceeding  great  and  precious 


130  Some   Modern    Isms. 

promises",  over  and  above  the  precious  promises  made  to 
all  mankind.  To  rightly  divide  the  word  of  truth,  we  should 
observe  that  the  Scriptures  recognize  the  perfection  of  the 
divine  nature  in  the  "little  flock"  and  the  perfection  of  the 
human  nature  in  the  restored  world,  as  two  separate  things." 
Vol.  1.  p.  180.  Cf.  p.  191. 

"The  conditions  on  which  the  Church  may  be  exalted  with 
her  lord  to  the  divine  nature  (2  Pet.  1:4),  are  precisely  the 
same  as  the  conditions  on  which  he  received  it,  even  by 
following  in  his  footprints  (1  Pet.  2:21),  presenting  her- 
self a  living  sacrifice,  as  he  did,  and  then  faithfully  car- 
rying out  that  consecration  even  until  the  sacrifice  termi- 
nates in  death.  This  change  of  nature  from  human  to  divine 
is  given  as  a  reward  to  those  who,  within  the  Gospel  age, 
sacrifice  the  human  nature,  as  did  our  Lord,  with  all  its  in- 
terests, hopes  and  aims,  present  and  future — even  unto  death. 
In  the  resurrection  such  will  awake,  not  to  share  with  the 
rest  of  mankind  in  the  blessed  restoration  to  human  per- 
fection and  all  its  accompanying  blessings,  but  to  share  the 
likeness  and  glory  and  joy  of  the  Lord,  as  partakers  with 
him  of  the  divine  nature."     Vol.  1,  195. 

Thus,  according  to  Russell,  here,  two  great  classes  of  man- 
kind are  destined  to  two  respective  stages  of  salvation :  ( 1 ) 
"the  little  flock",  to  elevation  to  the  divine  nature;  (2) 
The  great  body  of  mankind  to  Adamic  perfection.  Tht^re 
is  still  a  third  class,  a  small  class,  the  members  of  which 
will  not  avail  themselves  of  salvation  through  Christ  either 
in  the  Gospel  age,  or  in  the  Millennium. 

In  regard  to  Russell's  teaching  on  this  subject  of  the 
destiny  of  men,  we  remark: 

1st.  He  uses  the  same  sort  of  eisegesis  in  support  of  it 
for  which  he  is  remarkable  in  all  his  teaching.  Take,  for 
example,  his  dealing  with  1.  Cor.,  15:38,  44.  He  refers  to 
it  in  support  of  his  doctrine  that  the  major  part  of  Adam's 


Some    Modern    Isms.  131 

race  will  be,  in  th  resurrection,  "earthy,  human,  adapted  to 
the  earth".  Now,  verse  38,  "God  giveth  it  a  body  as  it 
hath  pleased  him,  and  to  every  seed  his  own  body,"  simply 
teaches  that  God  gives  to  all  products  of  the  earth  each  its 
own  form"  and  "  that  therefore,  at  the  resurrection  He  may 
give  to  man's  body  the  form  He  pleases  to  give  it.  One 
cannot  infer  from  looking  at  a  seed  what  form  the  plant 
is  to  have.  No  more  can  he  infer  the  form  of  the  resurrec- 
tion body  from  our  present  body."  Verse  44,  "It  is  sown  a 
natural  body,  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body",  teaches  that 
the  resurrection  body  shall  be  a  body,  adapted  to  the  spirit, 
and  which  from  Paul's  description  we  know  to  be  incor- 
^ptible,  glorious,  powerful  and  adapted  to  the  heavenly 
stage  existence,"  teaches  that  just  as  certainly  as  we  have 
bodies  adapted  to  our  present  existence  so  certainly  shall 
the  saint  have  bodies  adapted  to  their  future  existence.  The 
passage  does  not  support  Russell's  contention,  at  all.  (See 
also  1.  Cor.  15:48;  Hodge  in  loco.) 

2d.  Russell  gives  no  proof  that  Jesus,  prior  to  his  death, 
had  the  very  kind  of  human  nature  in  all  its  accidents  to 
which  the  mass  of  mankind  are  to  be  elevated. 

3d.  Another  radically  false  teaching  of  Russell's  here  is 
that  some  men— those  who  constitute  the  "little  flock"— are 
to  be  elevated  to  the  divine  nature.  The  finite  nature  can- 
not be  turned  into  the  infinite  nature.  The  created  nature 
cannot  be  turned  into  the  uncreated  nature.  Man  cannot 
become  the  highest  order  of  spirit.  This  is  impossible  even 
by  Almighty  power. 

Russell  misunderstands  and  vastly  overworks  2  Pet.  1:4: 
"That  ye  may  be  partakers  of  the  divine  nature."  The 
meaning  is:  That  ye  may  grow  into  holiness  as  perfect  for 
finite  beings  as  that  which  belongs  to  God  is  for  Him.  (Cf. 
Heb.  12:10;  but  he  chastens  'us  for  our  profit  that  we  might 
be  partakers  of  his  holiness').     The  remaining  clause  in  2 


132  Some    Modern   Isms. 

Pet.  1 :4,  "having  escaped  the  corruption  that  is  in  the  world 
through  lust,"  makes  clear  the  fact,  that  the  Apostle  has  in 
mind  in  the  foregoing  clause  the  getting  back  the  likeness 
to  God,  whose  image  was  lost  through  sin.  It  is  an  exchange 
of  the  quality  of  sin  for  the  quality  of  holiness  that  Peter 
holds  before  his  readers,  not  at  all  a  change  of  the  substan- 
tial nature — from  the  created  to  the  uncreated — a  thing  im- 
possible to  be  wrought  by  Divine  power  even. 

III.  Russell's  Soteriology:  or  His  Teaching  Concerning 
the  Covenant  Between  the  Father  and  the  Son;  the  Nature 
of  the  Mediator,  the  Nature  of  his  Sacrifice;  the  Results  of 
His  Sacrifice;  Christ's  Humiliation  and  Exaltation;  Two 
Kinds  of  Salvation;  Regeneration;  Salvation  by  Works — 
Three  Ways:  Faith,  Repentance,  Justification;  Sanctifica- 
tions  and  Good  Works. 

1.  Russell,  of  course,  can  know  nothing  of  a  Covenant  of 
Redemption  between  the  persons  of  the  trinity,  since,  as  we 
have  seen  he  teaches  that  there  was  no  trinity  of  persons  in 
the  Godhead.  He  teaches  that  the  God  determined  to  ransom 
Adam's  race  through  the  angel  Michael  as  ransomer,  and 
that,  accordingly.  He  turned  Michael  into  a  human  being. 

Russell  says  of  the  ransomer:  "When  he  was  made  flesh, 
to  be  our  Redeemer,  it  was  not  of  compulsion,  but  as  a 
voluntary  matter,  the  result  of  his  complete  harmony  with 
the  Father,  and  his  joyful  acquiescence  in  carrying  out  every 
feature  of  the  divine  will — which  he  had  learned  to  respect 
and  love."  Vol.  5,  p.  84. 

This  twaddle  not  only  gives  us  no  eternal  understanding 
and  harmony  of  purpose  between  the  Father  and  the  Son 
as  to  redemption,  but  gives  us  only  a  creature  redeemer — a 
redeemer  incompetent  to  the  work  of  redemption,  as  shall 
be  brought  out  subsequently.  If  this  contention  that  Christ 
is  a  mere  creature  could  be  made  good,  this  would  be  a 
death  blow  to  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  133 

2.  As  to  the  nature  of  the  Mediator,  Russell  teaches  noth- 
ing of  the  unity  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in  one 
personality  in  Christ.  In  Russell's  view  Christ  is  a  pure 
spirit  being  "before  the  incarnation  (so-called),  a  purely 
animal  being  of  the  human  class  during  the  period  of  his 
incarnation  (so-called),  and  a  pure  "spirit  being"  of  the 
highest  or  divine  type  after  his  "resurrection"  and  "eleva- 
tion." Jesus  of  Nazareth,  while  on  the  earth,  had  no  other 
nature  than  an  animal  nature.  See  quotations  on  page  5, 
of  this  paper. 

But  see  for  the  annihilation  of  this  twaddle  such  passages 
of  Scripture  as  John  3:13,  "No  man  hath  ascended  up  to 
heaven,  but  he  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son 
of  Man,  which  is  in  heaven."  Christ  could  only  be  in 
heaven,  while  on  earth  in  virtue  of  his  possession  of  the 
divine  nature.  See  also  remarks  on  p.  112,  of  this  paper,  in 
proof  that  Jesus  Christ  was  God  as  well  as  man. 

3.  Russell  teaches  as  to  the  nature  of  the  sacrifice  of  our 
Lord:  that  "Jesus  presented  His  perfect  humanity  a  sacri- 
fice, laying  down  all  right  and  claim  to  future  existence," 
(Vol.  1,  p.  199);  that  "his  human  existence  ended  on  the 
cross  (Vol.  1,  230),  that  "our  Lord's  being  or  soul  was  non- 
existent during  the  period  of  death:  "He  poured  out  his 
soul  unto  death:  He  made  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin." 
Vol.  5,  p.  362. 

Russell  teaches  that  God  willed  that  Jesus  should  thus  be 
come  non-existent,  and  that,  therefore,  it  is  right.     He  asks 
whether  God  "may  not  do  what  He  will  with  His  own.'' 

In  regard  to  this  impiety,  remark: 

1st.  If  Christ  became  non-existent  on  the  cross,  then  the 
Christ,  in  glory  is  not  the  same  Christ  at  all.  He  could  not 
rise  again  for  he  was  not.  The  so-called  Christ  in  glory, 
is  a  brand  new  being.  It  is  purely  arbitrary  to  regard  him 
as  in  any  way  connected  with  the  Christ  on  earth.     In  order 


134  Some   Modern    Isms. 

to  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  somewhat  must  remain  in 
being  after  death.  According  to  Russell,  Jesus  passed  into 
non-existence.  Then  Christ  "is  not  risen,"  and,  according 
to  Paul,  if  this  be  so,  "ye  are  yet  in  your  sins."  But  this 
by  the  way. 

2d.  It  is  more  important  to  notice  that  Russell's  doctrine 
on  this  subject  flatly  contradicts  the  Scriptures  which  teach 
that  Christ  was  to  be  in  paradise  the  very  day  of  his  death, 
not  another  being  but  he,  the  same,  that  subsequently  he 
appeared  to  his  disciples  and  identified  himself  as  the  very 
being  who  had  been  crucified,  who  bore  the  wound  prints 
in  hands  and  feet  and  side.  Russell  reduces  sober  and  blessed 
history  to  a  fraud. 

4.  Russell  teaches  as  to  the  results  of  Christ's  sacrifice: 
"Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  'the  man  Christ  Jesus,'  himself  un- 
blemished, approved,  and  with  a  perfect  seed  or  race  in  him, 
unborn,  likewise  untainted  with  sin,  gave  his  all  of  human 
life  and  title  as  the  full  ransom  price  for  Adam  and  the 
race  or  seed  in  him  when  sentenced.  Having  thus  fully 
purchased  the  lives  of  Adam  and  his  race,  Christ  offers  to 
adopt  as  his  seed,  his  children,  all  of  Adam's  race  who  will 
accept  the  terms  of  his  new  Covenant  and  thus  by  faith  come 
into  his  family — the  family  of  God — and  receive  everlast- 
ing life.  Thus  the  Redeemer  will  see  'his  seed'  (as  many 
of  Adam's  seed  as  will  accept  adoption  upon  his  condi- 
tions), and  prolong  his  days  (resurrection  to  a  higher  than 
human  plane,  being  granted  him  by  the  Father  as  a  reward 
for  his  obedience),  and  all  in  the  most  unlikely  way — by 
the  sacrifice  of  life  and  posterity.  And  thus  it  is  written: 
"As  all  in  Adam  die,  even  so  all  in  Christ  shall  be  made 
alive." 

"The  injury  we  received  through  Adam's  fall  (we  suf- 
fered no  injustice)  is  by  God's  favor,  to  be  more  than  offset 
with  favor  through  Christ;  and  all  will  sooner  or  later  (in 


Some    Modern    Isms.  135 

God's  due  time),  have  a  full  opportunity  to  be  restored  to 
the  same  standing  that  Adam  enjoyed  before  he  sinned. 
Those  who  do  not  receive  a  full  knowledge  and,  by  faith, 
an  enjoyment  of  this  favor  of  God  in  the  present  time  (and 
such  are  the  great  majority,  including  children  and  heathen), 
will  assuredly  have  these  privileges  in  the  next  age,  or 
"world  to  come,"  the  dispensation  or  age  to  follow  the  pres- 
ent. To  this  end,  all  that  are  in  their  graves  . 
shall  come  forth."  "As  each  one  becomes  aware  of  the 
ransom  price  given  by  our  Lord  Jesus,  and  of  his  subse- 
quent privileges,  he  will  be  considered  as  again  on  trial,  as 
Adam  was;  and  again  obedience  will  bring  everlasting  life, 
and  disobedience  everlasting  death — the  'second  death.'  Per- 
fect obedience  without  perfect  ability  to  render  it,  will  not 
be  required  of  any.  Under  the  New  Covenant,  the  Church, 
during  the  Gospel  age,  have  had  the  righteousness  of  Christ 
imputed  to  them  by  faith,  to  make  up  their  unavoidable  de- 
ficiencies through  the  weakness  of  the  flesh;  and  this  same 
grace  will  operate  toward  'whoever  will'  of  the  world  during 
the  millennial  age.  Not  until  physical  perfection  is  reached 
(which  will  be  the  privilege  of  all  before  the  close  of  the 
millennial  age),  will  absolute  moral  perfection  be  required. 
This  new  trial,  the  result  of  the  ransom  and  the  New  Cove- 
nant, will  differ  from  the  trial  in  Eden,  in  that  in  it  the 
acts  of  each  one  will  affect  only  his  own  nature.  Vol.  1, 
pp.  129,  130. 

Thus  Russell  teaches  that  the  satisfaction  rendered  by 
Jesus  Christ  (whom  he  represents  as  a  mere  man — ^the  high- 
est type  of  the  animal  kingdom),  resulted  in  a  new  trial 
to  the  children  of  Adam  individually  and  in  a  lowered  de- 
mand for  obedience  on  their  part  till  they  have  perfect  abil- 
ity to  render  perfect  obedience  restored  to  them  in  the  millen- 
nial age;  that  Christ  in  this  work,  not  only  sacrifices  him- 
self but  a  "race  which  is  in  him — sacrifices  his  "life  and 


136  Some    Modern    Isms. 

posterity;''  and  that  Adam's  posterity  because  of  their  ac- 
quaintance with  sin  and  the  more  lenient  conditions  of  the 
second   trial   are   much   more   likely   to   come   through   suc- 
cessfully. 
Remark : 

(1)  That  this  doctrine  involves  the  doctrine  of  salvation 
by  works  in  a  bald  form.  Through  Christ  a  new  opportunity 
to  win  salvation  is  offered  and  the  conditions  under  which 
it  may  be  won  are  made  more  favorable;  but  to  get  either 
of  two  salvations  offered,  a  man  must  work  it  out  himself. 

(2)  That  his  doctrine  of  a  lowered  demand  for  obedience 
to  righteous  law  is  dishonoring  to  God,  who  cannot  demand 
less  than  perfect  righteousness,  from  every  moral  creature,  ex- 
cept at  the  cost  of  abdicating  His  throne  of  holiness. 

(3)  That  to  teach  that  one  mere  rational  creature  can 
atone  for  the  guilt  of  another  is  stultifying,  if  God  be  just. 
The  creature  however  holy  and  exalted  is  under  obligation 
to  give  his  utmost  service  to  God  on  his  own  account.  He 
can  make  satisfaction  for  the  guilt  of  no  other  creature. 

(4)  His  exegesis  of  "As  all  in  Adam  die,  so,  all  in  Christ," 
etc.,  is  incorrect.     Dr.  Chas.  Hodge  says  of  this  passage: 

"That  the  word  all  in  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  is  to 
be  restricted  to  all  believers  (or  rather,  to  all  people  of  Christ, 
as  infants  are  included),  is  plain:  1.  Because  the  word  in 
both  clauses  is  limited.  It  is  the  all  who  are  in  Adam  that 
die;  and  the  all  who  are  in  Christ  who  are  made  alive.  As 
union  with  Christ  is  made  the  ground  of  the  communication 
of  life  here  spoken  of,  it  can  be  extended  only  to  those  who 
are  in  him.  But  according  to  the  constant  representation  of 
the  Scriptures,  none  are  in  him  but  his  own  people.  "If 
any  man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature."  2.  Cor.  5:17. 
2.  Because  the  verb  zooppoiatha  here  found  is  never  used  of 
the  wicked.  Whenever  employed  in  reference  to  the  work 
of  Christ  it  alwavs  means  to  communicate  to  them  that  life 


SoAiE    Modern    Isms.  137 

of  which  he  is  the  source,  John  5:21,  6:63;  Rom.  8:11;  I 
Cor.  15:45;  Gal.  3:21.  The  real  meaning  of  the  verse, 
therefore,  is,  'As  in  Adam  all  die,  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  partakers  of  a  glorious  and  everlasting  life.'  Unless, 
therefore,  the  Bible  teaches  that  all  men  are  in  Christ,  and 
that  all  through  him  partake  of  eternal  life,  the  passage 
must  be  restricted  to  his  own  people.  3.  Because,  although 
Paul  elsewhere  speaks  of  a  general  resurrection  both  of  the 
just  and  of  the  unjust.  Acts  24:15,  yet,  throughout  this 
chapter  he  speaks  only  of  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous. 
4.  Because,  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Rom.  5:12-21,  the 
same  limitation  must  be  made.  In  verse  18  of  that  chap- 
ter, it  is  said,  "As  by  the  offence  of  one  judgment  came  upon 
all  men  to  condemnation;  even  so  by  the  righteousness  of 
one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  to  justification  of  life.' 
That  is,  as  for  the  offence  of  Adam,  all  men  were  condemned, 
so  for  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  all  men  are  justified.  The 
context  and  the  analogy  of  Scripture  require  us  to  under- 
stand this  to  mean,  as  all  who  are  in  Adam  are  condemned, 
so  all  who  are  in  Christ  are  justified.  No  historical  Chris- 
tian church  has  ever  lield  that  all  men  indiscriminately  are 
justified.  For  whom  God  justifies  them  he  also  glorifies." 
Rom.  8:30."  See  Hodge,  Commentary  on  I  Corinthians,  I 
Cor.   15:22. 

5.  Russell  teaches  concerning  Christ's  humiliation  and  ex- 
altation, that  it  consists  in  his  being  turned  from  a  high 
angelic  spirit  being  into  a  human  being,  i.  e.,  into  the  highest 
type  of  animal  being,  his  living  the  human  animal  life,  and 
his  passing  at  the  crucifixion  into  absolute  non-existence, 
never  as  a  man  to  live  again;  and  that  his  exaltation  con- 
sists in  his  being  called  into  existence  again  as  a  spirit  be- 
ing and  being  "elevated"  into  the  divine  nature — the  highest 
type  of  existence. 

Quotations  already  adduced  make  this  plain.     Scriptures 


138  SoisiE    Modern    Isms. 

already  adduced  also  make  it  equally  plain  that  this  teach- 
ing conflicts  with  Scripture.  They  teach  that  he  continued 
to  exist  and  that  his  body  was  resurrected  from  the  dead. 
Hear  him  say  to  the  Apostles:  "Behold  my  hands  and  my 
feet,  that  it  is  I  myself:  handle  me  and  see;  for  a  spirit  hath 
not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me  have."  Luke  24:39,  etc. 

Common  sense  teaches  also  that  Russellism  at  this  point 
is  nonsense.  According  to  Russellism  the  unite  is  changed 
into  the  infinite — an  impossibility  as  has  been  already  pointed 
out. 

6.  Russell  teaches  four  kinds  of  salvation — a  salvation  to 
opportunity  to  all,  and  a  salvation  of  the  "little  flock"  to 
the  divine  nature,  and  a  salvation  of  certain  Church  mem- 
bers, justified  but  not  sanctified  to  a  spiritual  but  not  divine 
nature,  and  the  salvation  of  the  great  majority  to  Adamic 
perfection.    Thus  he  says: 

"  "We  see,  then,  that  the  general  salvation,  which  will  come 
to  every  individual,  consists  of  light  from  the  true  light,  and 
an  opportunity  to  choose  life;  and  as  the  great  majority  of 
the  race  is  in  the  tomb,  it  will  be  necessary  to  bring  them 
from  the  grave,  in  order  to  testify  to  them  the  good  tidings 
of  a  Savior;  also  that  the  special  salvation  which  believers 
now  enjoy  in  hope  (Rom.  8:24);  and  the  reality  of  which 
will,  in  the  millennial  age,  be  revealed  also,  to  those  who 
'believe  in  that  day,'  is  a  full  release  from  the  thraldom  of 
sin,  and  the  corruption  of  death,  into  the  glorious  liberty 
of  the  children  of  God.  But  attainment  to  all  these  bless- 
ings will  depend  upon  hearty  compliance  with  the  laws  of 
Christ's  Kingdom — the  rapidity  of  the  attainment  of  perfec- 
tion indicating  the  degree  of  love  for  the  King  and  for  his 
law  of  love."     Vol.  1,  p.  107. 

"This  change  of  nature  from  human  to  divine  is  given  as 
a  reward  to  those  who,  within  the  Gospel  age,  sacrifice  the 
human  nature,  as  did  our  Lord,  with  all  its  interests,  hopes 


Some   Modern   Isms.  139 

and  aims,  present  and  future — even  unto  death.  In  the 
resurrection  such  will  awake,  not  to  share  with  the  rest  of 
mankind  in  the  blessed  restitution  to  human  perfection  and 
all  its  accompanying  blessings,  but  to  share  the  likeness  and 
glory  and  joy  of  the  Lord,  as  partakers  with  him  of  the 
divine  nature."    Vol.  1,  p.  196.     Cf.,  also  pp.  153  and  211. 

Russell  teaches  that  there  are  believers  "who  shrink  from 
the  death  of  the  human  will"  but  whom  God  still  loves  and 
will  therefore  bring  "by  the  way  of  adversity  and  trouble 
to  the  perfect  spiritual  plane.  But  they  will  have  lost  the 
right  to  the  throne  of  glory." 

He  endeavors  to  support  his  doctrine  of  these  different 
types  of  salvation  by  an  eisegesis.  of  such  texts  as  I  Tim. 
2:10:  "The  Saviour  of  all  men,  especially  of  those  that 
believe";  John  3:6,  etc.,  and  by  the  assertion  that  the  only 
Scripture  quoted  to  prove  that  this  life  is  the  only  period 
of  probation  is  Eccles.  11:3,  "Where  the  tree  falleth,  there 
it  shall  lie." 

Now  this  latter  assertion  is  that  of  an  ignoramus  or  a 
falsifier.  "Behold,  now  is  the  accepted  time;  behold,  now 
is  the  day  of  salvation  (2  Cor.  6:2)  is  another  text:  "For 
we  (men)  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of 
Christ;  that  every  one  may  receive  the  things  done  in  his 
body,  according  to  that  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good 
or  bad"  (2  Cor.  5:10),  is  another;  and  there  are  others  and 
good  ones;  and  if  this  be  the  only  period  of  probation  Rus- 
sellism  at  this  point  has  a  broken  neck. 

Russell  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  do  not  harmonize  on 
the  subject  of  whether  there  is  a  class  of  the  saved  who  are 
not  joint  heirs  with  Jesus  Christ.  In  Matt.  25:31  ff.,  Christ 
presents  only  two  classes  as  obtaining  after  the  judgment 
the  saved  and  the  lost — the  heirs  of  eternal  life  and  the 
"Kingdom,"  and  the  doomed  to  everlasting  punishment.  If 
there  are  two  kinds  of  salvation  of  so  diverse  a  nature,  why 


140  Some   Modern    Isms. 

does  Christ  say  nothing  of  the  fact,  why  do  the  apostles  say 
naught  of  it? 

The  texts  from  Timothy  and  John  referred  to  above,  teach 
indeed  that  in  some  sense  Christ  ransomed  the  world,  that 
Christ  died  for  the  world,  and  has  he  not  by  his  death 
staved  off  the  world's  doom,  made  the  world  happier,  given 
many  privileges  to  the  world,  died  sufficiently  for  all  the 
world?  Yes;  has  he  not  wrought  out  redemption  for  all  the 
world  as  far  as  by  faith  it  will  receive  it,  as  Russell's  creature 
Christ,  his  merely  animal  Christ,  his  good  beast  Christ 
could  never  have  done?  Is  it  blasphemous  so  to  speak 
of  Christ?    But  that  is  Russellism. 

7.  Russell  teaches  concerning  the  transformation  of  those 
who  constitute  the  "little  flock." 

"The  beginning  and  development  of  the  new  nature  is 
likened  to  the  beginning  and  development  of  human  life. 
As  in  the  one  case  there  is  a  begetting  and  then  a  birth,  so 
in  the  other.  The  saints  are  said  to  be  begotten  of  God 
through  the  truth.  That  is,  they  receive  the  first  impulse 
in  the  divine  life  from  God  through  his  Word.  When  hav- 
ing been  justified  freely  by  faith  in  the  ransom,  they  hear 
the  call,  "Present  your  bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy  (ran- 
somed, justified — and  therefore)  acceptable  unto  God,  which 
is  your  reasonable  service"  (Rom.  12:1);  and  when  in 
obedience  to  that  call,  they  fully  consecrate  their  justified 
humanity  to  God  a  living  sacrifice,  side  by  side  with  that 
of  Jesus,  it  is  accepted  of  God;  and  in  that  very  act  the 
spiritual  life  is  begun.  Sufli  find  themselves  at  once  think- 
ing and  acting  as  the  new  (transformed)  mind  prompts, 
even   to  the   crucifixion   of  the   human   desires." 

"Thus  to  these  embryo  "new  creatures"  old  things  (human 
hopes,  plans,  etc.),  pass  away,  all  things  become  new." 

"The  birth  of  the  'new  creature'  is  in  the  resurrection 
(Col.  1:18);      .      .      .      It  should  be  remembered  that  we 


Some    Modern    Isms.  141 

are  not  actually  spirit  beings  until  the  resurrection."  .  .  . 
"When  we  become  spirit  beings  actually,  that  is  when  we 
are  born  of  the  Spirit,  we  will  no  longer  be  fleshly  beings; 
for  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit."  Vol  1,  pp. 
196,  197. 

He  thus  represents  the  change  as  begun  and  carried  on 
by  man  on  occasion  of  God's  giving  an  impulse  through  his 
truth,  up  to  death  and  as  completed  by  God  in  the  "resur- 
rection." 

On  this  remark : 

(1)  That  the  spirit  being  (said  here  to  be  born)  is  not 
the  same  with  that  human  animal  in  which  begetting  is 
said  to  be  begun  of  God.  The  one  passed  into  non-existence 
absolute  and  eternal.  Such  is  his  teaching.  There  is  no 
regeneration  of  one  being.  The  begettal  process  goes  on  in 
one  being.  The  birth  of  the  new  creature  is  that  of  a  sub- 
ject belonging  to  another  category  of  being.  The  new  being 
to  be  called  into  existence  is  not  I  and  has  none  but  an 
absolutely  arbitrary  connection  with  me  who  am,  if  Rus- 
sellism  be  true,  to  go  out  into  blank  non-entity?  Russell 
gives  us  here  more  intolerable  tom-foolery. 

(2)  The  process,  so  far  as  carried  out  this  side  of  the 
grave,  is  one  in  which  God's  part  is  moral  suasion,  and 
man's  part  the  real  outworking  of  the  saving  process.  But 
this  contradicts  Paul's  teaching,  Romans  8:29  ff.,  where  we 
are  taught  that  every  part  of  the  saving  process  is  carried 
on  efficiently  by  God. 

8.  Russell  magnifies  man's  part  in  his  own  salvation.  He 
says:  "The  conditions  on  which  the  Church  may  be  ex- 
alted with  her  Lord  to  the  divine  nature  (2  Pet.  1:4),  are 
precisely  the  same  as  the  conditions  on  which  he  received 
it;  even  by  following  in  his  footprints  (I  Peter  2:21),  pre- 
senting herself  a  living  sacrifice,  as  he  did,  and  then  car- 
rying out  that  consecrated  vow  until  the  sacrifice  terminates 
in  death."    Vol.  1,  p.  196. 


142  Some   Modern   Isms. 

Through  Vol.  1,  pp.  231-241,  Russell  teaches  that  the 
individuals  of  the  three  several  classes  of  the  saved,  each 
work  out  their  own  salvation  not  instrumentally,  but  effi- 
ciently. He  says  that  there  are  four  classes  in  the  nominal 
Gospel  Church;  that  one  class  consists  of  those  who  "are 
fulfilling  their  covenant  and  are  dead  with  Christ  to  earthly 
will,  aims,  and  ambitions,"  that  this  class  is  to  receive  ele- 
vation to  the  divine  nature;  that  a  second  class  consists  of 
those  who  believe  and  are  justified,  but  do  not  sacrifice  them- 
selves and  all  that  they  have  to  God;  that  through  belief, 
after  passing  through  adversity  and  trouble,  they  shall  be 
elevated  to  spiritual  natures,  though  they  shall  fail  of  ele- 
vation to  the  divine  nature;  that  the  third  class  consists  of 
those  who  are  justified  but  not  sanctified,  not  fully  conse- 
crated to  God,  and  not  begotten,  therefore,  not  spirit  beings, 
that,  if  they  improve  their  opportunities  in  the  millennial 
age,  they  shall  be  rewarded  with  human  Adamic  perfection; 
and  that  there  is  still  another  class,  consisting  of  those  who 
do  not  even  believe  on  Jesus,  that  these,  if  they  do  not  im- 
prove their  probation  in  the  millennial,  shall  be  annihilated. 

Russell  teaches,  accordingly,  that  there  are  three  ways  to 
salvation:  (1)  The  "narrow  way  to  life" — a  way  full  of 
"dangers  and  difficulties" — the  way  to  salvation  to  the  di- 
vine nature,  Vol.  1,  p.  207ff.;  (2)  the  same  way  less  stren- 
uously pursued  to  salvation  to  spiritual  nature  not  so  high 
as  the  divine,  and  (3)  the  high  way  to  holiness."  He  writes 
of  this  latter  way:  "The  way  back  to  actual  human  per- 
fection is  to  be  made  very  plain  and  easy;  so  plain  that  none 
may  mistake  the  way;  so  plain  that  the  way- faring  man, 
and  those  unacquainted  therewith,  shall  not  go  astray." 

This  magnification  of  man's  part  in  salvation  aligns  Rus- 
sell so  far  with  Pelagians ;  and  is  at  war  with  the  monergism 
of  salvation,  in  its  initial  stages  taught  in  the  Scriptures. 
The   un-Biblical    character   of   the    doctrine   that   men    are 


Some   Modern    Isms.  143 

saved  to  one  or  other  of  these  different  sorts  of  salvation, 
two  of  them  involving  the  substitution  of  a  different  sub- 
stance for  the  human  is  without  warrant  in  the  word  of 
God — a  piece  of  heathenism — a  form  of  Gnosticism  rivaling 
the  forms  current  in  second  and  third  centuries. 

9.  Russell  seems  to  teach  that  repentance  and  faith  are 
produced  simply  by  the  operation  of  suitable  divine  truth. 
He  says:  "We  now  suggest  that  only  the  few  have  ever 
had  a  sufficiency  of  light  to  produce  full  faith,  repentance 
and  reformation."     Vol.   1,  p.   158. 

But  the  Scriptures  teach  that  faith  is  the  activity  of  a 
regenerate  heart,  and  is  the  gift  of  God,  not  through  the 
truth,  but  on  occasion  of  the  presentation  of  truth. 

10.  Russell  teaches  concerning  justification  as  follows: 
"The  condition  upon  which  (in  this  age)  we  come  to  the 
justified  or  perfect  human  plane  is  that  Christ  died  for 
our  sins,  redeemed  us  and  lifted  us  up,  'through  faith  in 
his  blood'  to  the  perfect  plane  from  which,  in  Adam,  we 
fell.  And  being  justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  'with 
God'  (Rom.  5:1),  and  are  no  longer  esteemed  by  God  as 
enemies,  but  as  justified  human  sons,  on  the  same  plane  as 
Adam  and  the  Lord  Jesus,  except  that  they  were  actually 
perfect,  while  we  are  merely  reckoned  so  by  God."  Vol.  1, 
p.  232.     Cf.  236. 

This  teaching  jumbles  the  Scriptural  teaching  concern- 
ing justification.  Scripture  represents  justification  as  pardon 
plus  'grant  of  title  to  eternal  blessedness.  Russell  says, 
justification  restores,  "reckonedly"  to  Adamic  perfection. 
The  Scriptures  teach  that  justification  is  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  an  inheritance  among  the  saints.  See  such  texts  as 
Gal.  4:5,  "God  sent  forth  his  Son  .  .  .  that  he  might 
redeem  them  that  were  under  the  law,  that  we  might  re- 
ceive the  adoption  of  sons." 

Russell's  doctrine  makes  faith  the  ground  of  justification 
also.     In  this  he  is  Arminian. 


144  Some    Modern    Isms. 

Russell  says,  Vol.  5,  p.  241:  "Actual  justification  will 
be  the  route  of  approach  toward  God  during  the  millen- 
nium, under  the  guidance  and  help  of  the  great  mediator." 
He  teaches  that  in  that  age  most  men  will,  when  standing 
probation,  succeed,  that  the  law  will  be  lowered  proportion- 
ately to  man's  weakened  powers,  and  rise  only  with  the  rise 
of  his  powers — that  justification  will  be  a  man's  own  work- 
in  addition  to  all  its  other  follies,  his  doctrine  here  is 
strongly  Pelagian. 

11.  Russell  teaches  of  Sanctification  and  Good-works,  in 
general,  as  a  Semi-Pelagian,  but  his  teachings  has  its  own 
peculiarities.  The  members  of  the  "little  flock"  may  carry 
on  their  sanctification  to  the  point  of  "sinless  perfection." 
The  merely  justified  may  fail  altogether  to  improve  their 
opportunities  in  this  life  or  even  in  the  Millennium,  and 
so  fail  to  win  Adamic  perfection.  On  the  other  hand,  they 
may  in  the  millennial  age  reach  "Adamic  perfection." 
Everything  rests  with  them. 

Not  to  go  into  further  details  Russell's  Soteriology  is  a 
soteriology  without  a  redeemer  competent  to  man's  redemp- 
tion, without  a  recreative  agent  competent  to  renew  man's 
nature — a  soteriology  Pelagian  and  heathen. 

IV.  Russell's  Doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper. 

He  holds  that  immersion  is  the  proper  mode  of  symboli- 
cal, or  water,  baptism;  and  that  it  should  be  applied  to  be- 
lievers only.  He  represents  water  baptism  as  symbolical 
of  the  burial  of  the  believer  into  Christ. 

There  is  nothing  in  these  contentions  that  is  probably 
correct,  though  there  is  nothing  which  is  new  or  peculiar  to 
this  heretic. 

He  holds  that  the  Lord's  Supper  is  a  memorial  of  the 
anti-typical  lamb — of  Christ  (repudiates  the  doctrine  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Mass).  His  presentation  of  the  sacraments 
is  feeble. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  145 

V.  Russell's  Eschatology,  or  his  teaching  concerning 
Death,  the  Resurrection,  the  Return  of  Christ,  the  Millen- 
nium, the  General  Judgment,  Eternal  Life,  the  Punishment 
of  the  Incorrigible,  etc. 

1.  Russell  teaches  of  death  that  it  is  "non-existence,"  or 
"extinction  of  being.''  Thus  he  says:  "I  should  be  further 
remembered  that  when  Adam  forfeited  life,  he  forfeited  it 
forever;  and  not  one  of  his  posterity  has  ever  been  able  to 
expiate  his  guilt  or  to  regain  the  lost  inheritance.  All  the 
race  are  either  dead  or  dying.  And  if  they  could  not  expiate 
their  guilt  before  death,  they  certainly  could  not  do  it  when 
dead — when  not  in  existence."     Vol.  1,  p.  154. 

"However,  none  can  appreciate  this  Scriptural  argument 
who  do  not  admit  the  Scriptural  statement  that  death — ex- 
tinction of  being — is  the  wages  of  sin.  Those  who  think  of 
death  as  life  in  torment  not  only  disregard  the  meaning  of 
the  words  death  and  life,  which  are  opposites,  but  involve 
themselves  in  two  absurdities."     Vol.  1,  p.  159. 

But  Abraham,  Dives,  Lazarus,  Moses,  Samuel,  Christ, 
the  penitent  thief  on  the  cross,  and  others,  are  all  re- 
presented as  being,  or  about  to  live,  after  "death"  and 
prior  to  any  resurrection  or  restitution.  Paul  wrote,  "I  am 
in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  having  a  desire  to  depart  and  be 
with  Christ"  (Phil.  1:23);  "to  be  absent  with  the  body  is 
to  be  present  with  the  Lord,"  2  Cor.  5:8.  Paul  plainly 
had  no  such  view  of  death  as  C.  T.  Russell.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  taught  that  "God  is  the  God  of  the  living." 

Russell  has  an  easy  way  of  obviating  the  force  of  incon- 
venient texts.  For  example,  in  handling  the  account  of  the 
rich  man  and  Lazarus,  he  makes  Lazarus  represent  the  Gen- 
tiles who  have  received  the  Gospel,  while  the  rich  man  stands 
for  Judah  and  Benjamin,  and  his  five  brothers  for  the  re- 
maining ten  tribes.  Hear  some  further  of  his  lucubrations 
on  the  same  storv. 


146  Some   Modern   Isms. 

"Only  very  recently  we  have  had  an  exhibition  of  how 
this  rich  man  (Israel),  dead  as  a  nation,  but  alive  as  a 
people,  has  appealed  to  father  Abraham  to  have  Lazarus 
cool  his  tongue  with  a  drop  of  water.  Of  course  the  thought 
would  not  be  that  a  spirit  finger  should  take  a  literal  drop 
of  water  to  cool  a  literal  tongue.  The  interpretation  must 
be  looked  for  along  the  lines  of  a  parable.  The  fulfillment 
came  when  the  Jews  of  this  country,  in  a  general  petition, 
requested  the  president  of  the  United  States  to  co-operate 
with  other  Christiari  nations  and  intercede  on  behalf  of  their 
members  in  Russia  that  they  might  have  more  liberty  and 
less  persecution,  that  their  torments  might  be  cooled."  Vol. 
1,  No.  4,  of  People's  Pulpit,  column  1,  p.  2. 

2.  Russell  teaches  concerning  the  Resurrection : 

"Believers  can  for  themselves  (and  by  a  knowledge  of 
God's  plan,  for  others  also),  commit  their  spirits  (their 
power  of  life)  to  God's  hand  also,  as  did  our  Lord  and  as 
did  Stephen — full  of  faith  that  God's  promise  of  a  resur- 
rection would  be  fulfilled.  A  resurrection  will  mean  to  the 
world  a  reorganization  of  a  human  body,  and  its  vivify- 
ing or  quickening  with  life-energy,  the  spirit  of  life  (Heb. 
ruach  Greek,  pneuma.  To  the  Gospel  Church,  sharers 
in  the  "first  (chief)  resurrection,"  it  will  mean  the  impar- 
tation  of  the  spirit  of  life  energy  (Heb.  ruach,  Greek 
pneuma)  to  a  spirit  body.     I  Cor.  13:42-45;  Vol.  5,  p.  316. 

There  are,  therefore,  according  to  Russell,  two  kinds  of 
"resurrection,"  one  of  the  sharers  in  the  "first  resurrection" — 
the  "impartation  of  the  spirit  of  life,"  or  "life  energy,"  to 
a  "spirit  body,"  the  other  a  reorganization  of  a  human  body, 
and  its  vivifying,  or  quickening  with  life  energy.  There 
is  no  resurrection  here  of  the  bodies  of  saints  according  to 
Russell's  own  terms."  Their  resurrection  he  says  consists 
in  the  impartation  of  life  energy  to  a  "spirit  body."  Their 
old   body   was   dissolved   into   atoms   and   they  passed   into 


Some   Modern   Isms.  147 

non-existence,  a  new  body,  of  an  altogether  different  nature 
is,  in  "due  time,"  brought  into  existence  instead  of  the  old, 
and  life-energy  introduced  into  it.  This  new  being  to  take 
the  place  of  C.  F.  Russell,  has  no  more  connection  with 
him  than  has  the  angel  Gabriel.  Suppose  he  begins  to  think 
as  C.  F.  Russell  ceased  to  think  and  suppose  he  shall  carry 
on  the  same  lines  of  deception  and  suppose  he  turn  out  to 
be  just  as  resourceful  as  the  notorious  C.  T.  Russell,  and 
be  dubbed  C.  T.  Russell,  will  he  be  the  C.  T.  Russell,  of 
Pittsburg,  Brooklyn?  No;  Russell  tells  us  that  that  Russell 
of  Pittsburg,  etc.,  at  death  ceases  to  exist. 

The  "resurrection"  of  the  man  of  the  world  will  also,  if 
Russell's  teaching  be  true,  not  be  a  resurrection  of  the  man 
of  the  world  who  died,  but  a  creation  of  some  one  else  in  his 
place,  who  will  have  a  chance  at  an  individual  probation  in 
the  millennium.  The  man  of  the  world  at  death  became 
non-existent.     He  never  could  rise. 

Russell  should  call  his  "resurrection"  by  some  other  name. 
He  hangs  to  the  Bible  word,  but  puts  into  it  a  meaning  at 
war  with  the  Bible  meaning  of  the  word. 

The  Bible  view  of  the  resurrection  is  illustrated  in  the 
account  of  our  Lord's  resurrection.  He  is  represented  as  con- 
tinuing to  exist  in  his  spiritual  nature  in  and  through  death, 
as  resurrected  as  to  his  body,  that  body  being  raised  from 
a  state  of  death. 

3.  Russell  teaches  as  to  the  return  of  Christ,  that  "He 
(our  Lord),  is  no  longer  human  in  any  sense  or  degree;  for 
we  must  not  forget  what  we  have  learned  (see  Vol.  1.,  Chap. 
10),  that  natures  are  separate  and  distinct.  Since  he  is  no 
longer  in  any  sense  or  degree  a  human  being,  we  must  not 
expect  him  to  come  again  as  a  human  being,  as  at  the  first 
advent.  His  second  coming  is  to  be  in  a  different  manner 
as  well  as  for  a  different  purpose."     Vol.  2,  p.  107. 

"Though  our  Lord  at  his  second  advent  will  not  mani- 


148  Some   Modern   Isms. 

fest  his  presence  in  the  same  way  that  he  did  during  those 
forty  days  after  his  resurrection,  yet  we  have  his  assurance 
that  the  'Brethren  shall  not  be  in  darkness.'  Nay,  more, 
we  shall  have  an  aid,  which  they  could  not  and  did  not 
have  to  help  them  during  those  forty  days,  viz.,  "power 
from  on  high,"  to  guide  us  into  the  understanding  of  every 
truth  due  to  be  understood,  and  even  as  promised  to  show 
us  things  to  come.  Hence  in  due  season  we  shall  have  full 
understanding  of  the  manner,  time  and  attendant  circum- 
stances of  his  appearing."     Vol.  2,  p.  122. 

"It  is  the  Lord's  plan  that  his  spiritual  Kingdom  shall 
communicate,  operate  and  manifest  its  presence  and  power 
through  human,  earthly  agencies."     Vol.  2,  p.  123. 

"No  one  properly  recognizing  his  great  exaltation  can  ex- 
pect at  his  second  coming  the  man  Christ  Jesus  in  the  body 
of  flesh  prepared  for  sacrifice  and  wounded  and  given  in 
death  as  our  ransom."    Vol.  2,  p.  135. 

"We  should  expect  that  Christ  would  be  manifest  in  the 
flesh  of  mankind  in  the  same  manner  that,  when  the  Word 
was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  men,  God  was  manifest 
in  his  flesh." 

"Mankind  in  general,  as  its  members  come  gradually  back 
to  the  long-lost  image  of  God,  will  be  fleshly  images  and 
likenesses  of  the  Father  and  of  Christ.  At  the  very  be- 
ginning of  the  Millennium,  as  we  have  seen,  there  will  be 
samples  of  perfect  manhood  before  the  world  (Vol.  1,  pp. 
287-293) ;  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  and  the  holy  prophets, 
already  tried  and  approved,  will  be  the  'princes'  among  men, 
the  exponents  and  representatives  of  the  spiritual  invisible 
Kingdom.  In  these  Christ  will  be  manifested — in  their 
flesh.  And  as  'Whosoever  will,  reaches  perfection  and  comes 
into  full  harmony  with  the  will  of  Christ,  every  such  one 
will  be  an  image  of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  in  each  of  these 
Christ    will    be    manifested."      Vol.    2,    p.    136. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  149 

"The  Christ  'changed'  made  partakers  of  the  divine  na- 
ture, shall  be  spirit  beings  as  truly  as  is  Satan  and  equally 
invisible  to  men.  Their  operations  will  be  similar  in  man- 
ner, though  directly  opposite  in  character  and  results,  their 
honored  agents  not  bound  and  made  slaves  by  ignorance  and 
weakness,  as  are  most  of  the  servants  of  Satan,  but  made 
perfect,  and  'free  indeed,'  will  act  intelligently  and  har- 
moniously, from  choice  and  from  love;  and  their  appoint- 
ments will  be  rewards  of  righteousness."     Vol.  2,  p.  137. 

Thus  Russell  denies  a  bodily  return  of  Christ.  Christ 
is  to  come  back — rather  Russell  teaches  that  he  came  back 
in  1874 — and  manifest  himself  through  perfect  human  be- 
ings. 

Tell  Russell  that  the  Scriptures  represent  the  return  of 
Christ  as  in  bodily  form — that  men  shall  see  him,  he  will 
carry  you  drearily  through  pages  endeavoring  to  explain 
that  men  shall  see  Christ  on  his  second  advent  only  through 
their  mind's  eyes.  Passages  that  are  to  be  taken  literally 
as  the  contexts  show,  he  takes  figuratively. 

4.  Russell  teaches,  concerning  the  millennium,  that  the 
Bible  "shows  that  all  who  do  not  see  or  appreciate  the 
blessed  privilege  of  entering  shall  in  due  time  be  brought  to 
a  full  knowledge  and  appreciation  (of  the  'door  of  hope'). 
The  only  way  by  which  any  and  all  of  the  condemned  race 
may  come  to  God,  is  not  by  meritorious  works,  neither  by 
ignorance,  but  by  faith  in  the  precious  blood  of  Christ, 
which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  Vol.  1,  p.  104. 
He  teaches  that  all  who  ever  have  lived,  are  living  or  shall 
live  between  the  beginning  and  the  Millennium  and  had  no 
knowledge  or  appreciation  of  Christ  are  to  be  "resurrected" 
from  non-existence  and  given  a  good  long  trial  in  the  mil- 
lennial age,  and  that  the  most  of  them  will  avail  themselves 
of  that  opportunity  for  restoration  to  the  Adamic  perfec- 
tion.    He  builds  very  largely  on  I.  Timothy  2:5,  6:     "There 


150  Some   Modern    Isms. 

is  one  God,  and  one  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,  who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  to 
be  testified  in  due  time."  He  says,  "God  has  a  time  for 
everything.  He  could  have  testified  to  these  in  their  past 
life-time.  But  since  he  did  not,  it  proves  their  due  time  must 
be  future."  Vol.  1,  p.  105.  Russell  has  a  great  way  of 
reading  into  Scripture  words  not  found.  E.  g.,  on  p.  107 
of  Vol.  1,  he  has  to  be  testified  to  all  in  due  time. 

Now  this  verse  teaches  that  the  oneness  of  the  Mediator, 
who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all  by  his  death,  was  the 
great  truth  which  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come  and 
onward  to  the  time  of  Christ's  return,  was  to  be  testified  of 
by  Apostles,  evangelists,  ministers — the  Church  which  was 
commissioned  to  make  disciples  of  all  nations. 

No  exegesis  of  this  and  the  other  passages  adduced  can 
get  out  of  it  and  them  any  support  for  the  doctrine  of  a 
publication  of  the  Gospel  to  all  the  Millennium  who  have 
not  believed  in  this  life.  For  this  text  must  be  taken  in 
the  light  of  2  Cor.  5:10;  2  Cor.  5:11;  Luke  16:26; 
Isa.  38:11.  For  a  discussion  of  Second  Probation,  see  Asa  E. 
House,  The  Homilist,  pp.   183,  ff.,  and  the  whole  Bible. 

Russell  meanders  on:  "God  thus  limits  the  evil  which 
he  permits,  by  providing  that  the  millennial  reign  of  Christ 
shall  accomplish  the  full  extinction  of  evil  and  also  of  wilful 
evil-doers,  and  usher  in  an  eternity  of  righteousness,  based 
upon  full  knowledge  and  perfect  free-will  obedience  by  per- 
fect beings."     (Vol.  1,  p.  133). 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  says  of  some 
that  they  "shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment." 
Matt.  25:46. 

In  teaching  that  the  second  advent  of  Christ  took  place 
in  1874,  that  those  who  were  asleep  in  Christ — "the  little 
flock" — experienced  their  resurrection  in  1878,  and  that  the 
time  of  the  Church  of  Christ  expired  in  October,  1914,  that 


Some   Modern    Isms.  151 

the  overthrow  of  Christendom  immediately  followed;  that 
"the  present  governments  must  all  be  overturned  about  the 
close  of  A.  D.  1915"  (Vol.  2,  p.  243),  he  teaches  what  his- 
tory has  not  confirmed,  but  apparently  refuted.  If  Christ 
came  in  any  special  way  in  1874,  that  remains  to  be  proved; 
if  the  resurrection  of  the  "little  flock"  took  place  in  1878,  we 
want  proof;  if  the  Christian  Church  no  longer  exists  since 
1914,  there  are  millions  of  honester  people  than  Russell 
either  mistaken  or  intentionally  lying.  They  represent  the 
Church  as  active  today.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  commotion 
amongst  the  governments,  but  certainly  the  most  of  them 
were  not  aware  of  having  been  overturned  at  the  close  of 
1915. 

5.  Russell  resolves  the  day  of  judgment  into  a  probation- 
ary trial  (millennium).  (See  Vol.  1,  pp.  137-143).  He 
says:  "The  second  trial  will  be  more  favorable  than  the 
first,  because  of  the  experience  gained  under  the  results  of 
the  first  trial"  (that  in  Adam).  "Unlike  the  first  trial, 
the  second  trial  will  be  one  in  which  every  man  will  stand 
the  test  for  himself  alone,  and  not  for  another.  None  will 
then  die  because  of  Adam's  sin,  or  because  of  inherited  im- 
perfections. .  .  .  Under  the  reign  of  Christ  mankind 
will  gradually  be  educated,  trained  and  disciplined  until 
they  reach  perfection.  And  when  they  have  reached  per- 
fection, perfect  harmony  with  God  will  be  required,  and 
any  who  then  fall  short  of  perfect  obedience  will  be  cut  off, 
being  judged  unworthy  of  life.  The  sin  which  brought  death 
to  the  race  through  Adam  was  simply  one  disobedient  act; 
but  by  that  act  he  fell  from  his  perfection.  God  had  a  right 
to  demand  perfect  obedience  of  him,  since  he  was  created 
perfect;  and  he  will  demand  the  same  of  all  men  when  the 
great  work  of  restoring  them  is  complete."  Vol.  1,  pp.  143-4. 

Now,  over  against  this  Russellite  doctrine  which  resolves 
the  judgment  into  another  period  of  probation,  we  set  Paul, 


152  Some    Modern    Isms. 

2  Cor.  5:10:  "We  must  all  be  made  manifest  before  the 
judgment  seat  of  Christ;  that  each  one  may  receive  the  things 
done  in  the  body,  according  to  what  he  hath  done,  whetler 
it  be  good  or  bad,"  and  Matt.  25:31-46.  These  and  other 
passages  make  it  plain  that  there  is  to  be  a  real  forensic 
judgment,  and  that  men  are  to  be  judged  for  what  they  have 
done  in  the  body.  These  passages  do  not  speak  of  a  pro- 
bationary period;  but  a  day  of  declaration  of  awards. 

6.  Russell  teaches  concerning  "eternal  life,"  that  it  is 
mere  existence,  exclusively  a  quantity  not  a  quality  of  life, 
that  it  is  not  something  now  won  by  faith,  but  a  future  in- 
heritance conditioned  upon  good  conduct  and  character  dur- 
ing a  period  of  probation. 

But  John  3:36,  says:  "He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath 
eternal  life."  "Nothing  certainly  is  so  evident  as  that,  in 
the  Bible,  'life'  means  a  spiritual  state  (with  its  'physical- 
counterpart,  of  course)  marked  by  intensive  quality,  and  de- 
riving this  quality  from  the  relationship  in  which  the  liv- 
ing person  is  conceived  as  standing  to  the  living  God.  'Life' 
is  used  frequently  as  the  equivalent  of  'eternal  life,'  that  is, 
it  connotes  blessedness,  activity  and  vigor  of  which  the  be- 
liever is  participant  in  virtue  of  his  unity  with  God  through 
Christ."    Mackintosh,  Immortality  and  the  Future,  p.  214. 

7.  Russell  teaches  of  the  punishment  of  the  incorrigible, 
of  the  millennial  period — of  those  who  will  not  when  given 
individual  trial  avail  themselves  of  their  opportunities  for 
life — that  they  are  annihilated.  He  says,  after  this  future 
probation,  "Then  those  who  prove  themselves  unworthy  of 
life  will  die  again — the  second  death — from  which  there  will 
be  no  redemption,  and  consequently  no  resurrection.     . 

The  death  which  comes  as  a  result  of  individual,  wilful 
apostasy  is  final.  This  sin  hath  never  forgiveness,  and  its 
penalty,  the  second  death,  will  be  everlasting — not  everlast- 
ing dying,  but  everlasting  death — a  death  unbroken  by  a 
resurrection."    Vol.  1,  p.  158. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  15«^ 

Death,  remember,  according  to  Russell,  is  non-existence. 
Not  so  according  to  the  Bible.  The  Biblical  meaning  of  life 
fixes  that  of  death.  "Death  is  the  absence  of  all  that  forms 
the  specific  content  of  life.  It  is  the  withdrawal  of  every- 
thing that  imparts  value  to  life  for  the  religious  mind.  Con- 
tact with  God  is  lost,  and  with  it  all  that  is  wrapped  up 
in  the  word  'blessedness.'  No  terms  of  description  are  too 
vivid  or  powerful  to  paint  its  misery  and  ruin.  It  is  de- 
struction, perishing,  the  last  calamity.  .  .  .  But  the 
definite  loss  of  consciousness  is  nowhere  associated  with  it. 
As  Prof.  A.  B.  Davidson  has  said  of  the  writers  of  the  Old 
Testament:  'For  all  that  appears,  the  idea  that  any  person 
should  become  extinct  or  be  annihilated  never  occurred  to 
them.'  In  their  view  to  survive  apart  from  God  is  to  abide 
in  death.  Because  death  is  'abiding,'  and  not  non-existence. 
New  Testament  writers  can  speak  of  men  as  having  passed 
'from  death  unto  life,'  and  can  ascribe  tribulation  and  anguish 
to  the  life  of  the  lost  in  the  world  to  come.  In  short,  to 
render  life  and  death  as  existence  and  non-existence  is  to 
represent  the  Bible  as  fixing  its  chief  interest  not  in  spiritual 
realities  but  in  a  bare  and  hard  ontology.  Death  is  to  be 
undone,  to  be  in  ruin,  to  miss  everything  that  can  be  called 
well-being;  but  it  is  not  to  vanish  in  extinction.  Thus  one 
of  the  main  pleas  of  annihilationism,  that  to  call  death  what 
is  a  kind  of  suffering  life  is  absurd,  will  not  bear  scrutiny 
for  a  moment  in  the  light  of  Bible  teaching.  Even  common 
speech  refutes  it.  We  speak  of  a  dead  tree,  or  dead  flesh, 
because  these  things  have  parted  with  all  that  constituted 
their  value  or  charm;  but  they  have  not  ceased  to  be.  What 
has  happened  is  a  rupture  of  the  tie  linking  them  to  life." 
Mackintosh,  Immortality  and  the  Future,  pp.  214-215. 

Christ  says  of  some  that  they  "shall  go  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment,"  Matt.  2v3:46. 

VI.  The  Fruit  of  Russellism  does  not  speak  well  for  the 
moral  worth  of  the  ism. 


154  Some    Modern    Isms. 

It  is  fair  to  test  the  character  of  a  system  by  its  fruits. 
This  was  a  method  of  the  Master. 

Russell  in  his  later  years  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  sample 
of  the  kind  of  man  Russellism  tends  to  make:  and,  unless 
he  has  been  grossly  slandered  his  character  would  indicate 
that  the  teaching  is  not  good. 

1.  He  could  hardly  have  been  a  worthy  husband.  In 
1879  he  had  married  Miss  Maria  F.  Ackley.  She  divorced 
him  after  many  years  of  married  life,  on  the  ground  of 
cruelty  and  of  having  wrong  relations  with  other  women. 
In  court  she  proved  improprieties  between  him  and  a  woman 
named  Rose  Bell. 

2.  He  has  changed  the  name  of  his  publications  at  least 
three  times.  He  is  charged  with  having  done  this,  in  part, 
to  frustrate  the  verdict  of  the  court  in  giving  his  wife  ali- 
mony, and  in  part  to  prevent  his  publication  business  from 
suffering  because  of  his  shady  reputation. 

3.  He  has  deceived  a  wide  public  by  publishing  his 
writings  under  the  appellation  of  the  "International  Bible 
Students'  Association."  People  have  been  led  by  this  title 
to  believe  that  a  great  body  of  accredited  scholars  represent- 
ing many  nations  is  back  of  these  views.  But  the  title  is 
a  misnomer.  The  views  are  those  of  C.  T.  Russell.  The 
Brooklyn  Eagle  charged  him  with  giving  out  that  he  was 
an  interdenominationalist,  whereas  he  was  connected  with 
none  but  opposed  to  all. 

4.  The  same  paper  charged  him  with  publishing  him- 
self as  having  given  addresses  to  great  crowds  in  important 
places,  whereas  he  had  not  spoken  in  those  places  at  all. 

5.  It  charged  him  with  seeking  to  dupe  certain  ministers 
into  supporting  daring  transactions  connected  with  lead, 
asphalt  and  turpentine  companies. 

6.  It  charged  him  with  selling  or  causing  to  be  sold 
"Miracle  Wheat,"  at  $60.00  a  bushel,  with  influencing  the 


Some   Modern    Isms.  155 

sick  and  dying  to  make  their  wills  in  his  favor,  with  engi- 
neering the  sale  of  a  property  worth  $35,000  for  $50,  for 
the  purpose  of  defrauding  another.  (See  Some  Facts  and 
More  Facts  about  the  Self-Styled  "Pastor"  'Charles  T. 
Russell.) 

7.  It  is  charged  that  he  has  contradicted  himself  repeatedly 
while  under  oath — that  he  has  been  guilty  of  perjury  re- 
peatedly.    (Facts  and  More  Facts,  pp.  18,  19). 

8.  It  is  charged  that  he  became  very  wealthy  and  yet 
that  he  posed  as  poor,  holding  his  properties  not  in  his 
own  name. 

9.  It  is  charged  that  he  has  belittled  the  labors  and  ser- 
vices of  the  greatest  servants  of  Christ  throughout  the  ages; 
that  notably  he  has  endeavored  to  belittle  modern  mission- 
aries and  their  labors.  (See  C.  C.  Cook's  "All  About  One 
Russell,"  pp.  20  ff.)  to  belittle  the  labors  of  Carey,  Jud- 
son,  Morrison,  Livingston,  and  the  like. 

He  had  met  but  two  missionaries  in  all  his  travels — had 
not  talked  on  missions  with  them — knew  nothing  of  missions. 

10.  His  advertisements  of  himself  as  Pastor  Russell,  "of 
the  Brooklyn  Tabernacle,"  and  of  the  "London  Tabernacle," 
were  misleading. 

11.  He  lacked  forms  of  ministry  to  human  need. 

12.  He  is  charged  with  blasphemy,  or  slander  of  God  and 
his  Word.  On  page  298,  of  his  Watch  Tower,  of  the  issue 
of  September  15,  1910,  it  is  written,  concerning  his  books: 

"If  the  six  volumes  of  'Scripture  Studies'  are  practically 
the  Bible,  topically  arranged,  with  Bible  proof  texts  given, 
we  might  not  improperly  name  the  volumes  'The  Bible  in 
an  arranged  form.'  That  is  to  say,  they  are  not  mere  com- 
ments on  the  Bible,  but  they  are  practically  the  Bible  itself. 
Furthermore,  not  only  do  we  find  that  people  cannot  see 
the  Divine  plan  in  studying  the  Bible  by  itself,  but  we 
see  also,  that  if  any  one  lays  the  'Scripture  Studies'  aside, 


156  Some   Modern    Isms. 

even  after  he  has  used  them,  after  he  has  become  familiar 
with  them,  after  he  had  read  them  for  ten  years — if  he 
then  lays  them  aside  and  ignores  them  and  goes  to  the  Bible 
alone,  though  he  has  understood  his  Bible  for  ten  years, 
our  experience  shows  that  within  two  years  he  goes  into 
darkness.  On  the  other  hand,  if  he  had  merely  read  the 
'Scripture  Studies'  with  their  references  and  had  not  read  a 
page  of  the  Bible  as  such,  he  would  be  in  the  light  at  the 
end  of  two  years,  because  he  would  have  the  light  of  the 
Scriptures."  (Facts  and  More  Facts  about  Pastor  Russell, 
p.  42).     Is  he  not  an  anti-Christ? 

It  should  be  noted  that  when  Russell  sued  the  Brooklyn 
Eagle  for  $100,000,  the  court  gave  judgment  against  him, 
thus  justifying  the  Eagle  for  exposing  this  impostor. 

Russell's  no-hell  doctrine  may  have  been  begotten  in  part 
by  the  wish  that  there  be  no  hell  for  such  sinners  as  himself. 

In  fine: 

Russellism  is  one  of  the  most  blasphemous  and  destructive 
of  all  heresies.  It  contradicts  almost  every  fundamental  doc- 
trine of  the  Christian  faith.  It  boldly  denies  the  proper 
deity,  incarnation,  resurrection,  ascension  and  priestly  in- 
tercession of  Jesus  Christ.  It  teaches  that  he  perished — 
passed  into  non-existence — is  eternally  dead.  It  denies  the 
personality  and  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  makes  the 
Holy  Ghost  a  mere  influence.  It  degrades  man  to  the  level 
of  an  animal,  robs  him  of  spirit  dowered  with  endless  exist- 
ence, turns  the  penalty  for  sin  into  annihilation.  It  gives 
us  a  creature  savior  impotent  to  bring  us  to  God,  vitiates  the 
Scriptural  doctrines  of  regeneration,  faith,  repentance,  justi- 
fication. It  perverts  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  second  coming, 
the  judgment  to  come,  life  eternal,  and  everlasting  death.* 

•See  Summary  of  Millennial  Dawnism,  in  C.  C.  Cook's,  "All  About  One 
Russell."    pp.    18,    19. 


Some    Moder:n    Isms.  157 


Nietzscheism : 
or  the  Will  to  Power 

Recent  world  movements  give  to  Nietzshe's  teaching  an 
interest  of  no  mean  kind. 


158  Some    Modern    Isms. 


Literature  on  Nietzscheism 


The  Complete  Works  of  Friedrich  Nietzsche. 

The  first  complete  and  authorized  English  translation. 
Edited  by  Dr.  Oscar  Levy,  in  18  volumes.  Edinburgh 
and  London.     1909-1913,  is  a  convenient  version. 

Lichtenberger,    Henri:     The    Gospel    of   Superman.      1910. 
London. 

Figgis,  J.  N.,  D.  D.,  Litt.  D.:     The  Will  to  Freedom.     (An 
able  book). 

Mugge,  M.  A.:     Friedrich  Nietzsche. 


Some   Modern   Isms.  159 

Nietzscheism :  or  the  Will  to  Power 


I.  Who  was  Nietzsche? 

Friedrich  Nietzsche  was  born  October  15,  1844,  in  the 
village  of  Rocken,  in  the  Prussian  province  of  Saxony.  His 
father,  a  son  and  grandson  of  ministers,  was  Karl  Ludwig 
Nietzsche,  who  became  mentally  deranged  and  died  while 
Friedrich  was  still  a  small  boy;  his  mother  was  Franziska 
Oehler,  a  daughter  and  granddaughter  of  ministers,  a  woman 
of  apparent  piety,  who  reared  her  son  with  care,  saw  his 
development  into  apostasy,  his  lapse  into  lunacy,  and  tended 
him  with  devoted  solicitude  in  his  years  of  insanity.  Frau 
Nietzsche,  on  the  death  of  her  husband,  removed  with  her 
two  children,  Friedrich  and  Elizabeth,  to  Naumburg,  and 
brought  them  up  in  a  pious  and  respectable  circle. 

Friedrich,  as  a  boy,  disliked  vulgarity,  made  few  friends, 
but  formed  some  passionate  attachments,  did  well  as  a 
student  in  the  local  school.  From  Naumburg  he  was  sent 
to  the  ancient  and  famous  public  school  at  Pforta — a  school 
in  which  boys  were  prepared  for  a  university  course — a 
school  which  endeavored  to  mold  the  life  as  well  as  to  in- 
form the  mind.  He  was  regarded  as  a  brilliant  student  in 
everything  but  mathematics,  got  into  one  serious  scrape,  at 
least,  for  drunkenness,  received  the  stamp  of  the  school — a 
kindled  desire  to  achieve  a  reputation  for  himself  regard- 
less of  cost.  Here  he  lost  his  inherited  faith.  He  had 
been  brought  up  in  the  externals  of  the  Lutheran  religion. 
The  higher  criticism  expounded  by  one  or  two  of  his  masters 
bore  its  legitimate  fruit  in  the  soil  of  his  heart.  He  hauled 
up  the  anchors  of  his  ship,  left  the  moorings  of  the  word  of 
God  and  sailed  forth  on  the  sea  of  doubt  without  chart,  or 
compass. 


160  Some   Modern   Isms. 

From  Pforta  he  proceeded  to  Bonn,  in  1864,  became  a 
typical  university  student,  given  to  beer-drinking,  singing, 
and  duelling  as  much  as  to  study,  but,  after  a  little,  wearied 
of  this  life,  turned  more  to  the  study  of  philology,  and  for 
recreation,  to  music.  While  studying  here,  he  wrote  to  his 
sister,  who  was  worrying  over  his  religious,  or  irreligious 
attitude:  "If  you  desire  peace  of  soul  and  happiness,  be- 
lieve; if  you  want  to  be  a  disciple  of  truth,  search."  In  the 
fall  of  1865,  he  went  to  Leipsic,  where  he  studied  philology 
hard  for  two  years,  came  under  the  influence  of  Schopen- 
hauer, whose  philosophy  as  set  forth  in  "The  World  as'  Will 
and  Idea,"  revolutionized  his  outlook  on  life,  and  cut  every 
remaining  fibre  binding  him  to  Christianity.  True,  he  was 
for  the  most  part  professedly  to  repudiate  this  system,  and 
to  bedevil  sympathy  and  resignation  of  which  Schopenhauer 
makes  so  much;  but  he  received  indelible  marks  from  the 
hand  of  Schopenhauer. 

In  1867,  he  had,  though  short-sighter,  to  fulfill  the  obliga- 
tion to  one  year's  military  service.  He  turned  out  to  be  a 
promising  soldier,  was  an  excellent  horseman,  and  developed 
a  fondness  for  war  and  an  itch  for  class  distinction;  but  an 
accident,  the  laceration  of  pectoral  muscles  while  mounting 
his  horse,  put  a  stop  to  his  military  career. 

Returning  to  Leipsic,  he  gave  himself  with  great  energy 
and  brilliancy  to  philology;  became  acquainted  with  Wag- 
ner's music  and  enamored  of  Wagner  himself;  was  recom- 
mended by  his  professor  Ritschl  for  the  Chair  of  Classical 
Philogy  in  the  University  of  Basle,  and,  though  only 
twenty-four  years  of  age,  and,  as  yet,  without  a  doctor's 
degree,  was  elected  to  the  chair.  There,  in  the  course  of 
1869,  he  is  found  lecturing  to  eight  students  in  philology. 
Wagner  was  now  the  idol  of  Nietzsche — an  idol  whom  he 
called,  in  1888,  "a  clever  rattlesnake,  a  typical  decadent." 

During    the    Franco-Prussian    war    of     1870,     although 


Some    Modern    Isms.  161 

Nietzsche  had  become,  in  order  to  serve  as  Professor  in  Basle, 
a  citizen  of  Switzerland,  he  obtained  leave  to  go  to  the 
front  as  a  nurse.  While  employed  in  caring  for  wounded 
German  soldiers,  he  contracted  from  them  dysentery  and 
diptheria.  Returning  to  his  professorship  before  his  health 
was  sufficiently  restored,  he  fell  ill,  suffered  from  insomnia, 
indigestion,  eye  trouble,  neuralgia.  After  ten  years  of  pro- 
fessorial life,  his  state  of  health  compelled  him  to  resign, 
in  1879. 

Meantime  he  had  begun  to  write  books.  Late  in  1879, 
his  "The  Birth  of  Tragedy"  had  appeared— a  Wagnerite 
tract.  In  it  he  contrasts  Greek  culture  before  and  after  So- 
crates. The  culture,  the  civilization  before  Socrates  was 
strong,  cruel,  grand;  the  culture  after  Socrates  was  "impious, 
bloodless,  feeble."  "Socrates  was  a  degenerate."  The  cul- 
ture of  the  writer's  own  age  is  pronounced  to  be  decadent, 
Socratic,  not  Dionysian.  The  author  seems  to  teach  that 
the  tragic,  cruel,  grand  age  will  return  if  the  voice  of  Wag- 
ner's great,  mystic,  music  be  heeded.  The  philosophic  stand- 
point of  the  book  is  seen  in  these  statements:  "Only  as 
aesthetic  phenomena  existence  and  the  world  appear  justi- 
fied." "Art  supplies  man  with  the  necessary  veil  of  illusion 
which  is  required  for  action.  For  the  true  knowledge  of  the 
awfulness  and  absurdity  of  existence  kills  action."  He  be- 
trays, even  in  this  work,  himself  as  wanting  in  a  sense  of 
right. 

Between  1873  and  1876,  he  published  four  long  essays 
which  were  entitled  Thoughts  Out  of  Season.  In  the  first  he 
trounces  the  shallowness  and  self-sufficiency  of  his  con- 
temporary German  teaching;  in  the  second  he  excoriates 
his  contemporaries  and  those  professors  who  make  historic 
learning  an  idol,  and  by  it  destroy  illusions  and  rob  existing 
things  thus  of  the  only  conditions  in  which  they  can  live; 
in  the  third,  he  extols  Schopenhauer  as  the  great  philosopher 


162  Some    Modern    Isms. 

and  type  of  the  future  man,  and  skins  the  state-paid  servile 
university  professor;  in  the  fourth,  he  lauds  Wagner  as  the 
discoverer  of  art.  He  says  of  Wagner:  "No  artist  of  what 
past  soever  has  yet  received  such  a  remarkable  portion  of 
genius."  As  yet  Nietzsche  regarded  Wagner  as  a  great  anti- 
Christian  force.  As  Wagner  began  to  adopt  at  least  senti- 
mental reverence  for  Christianity,  Nietzsche  began  to  cool  in 
admiration  for  the  great  musician,  and  to  regard  him  as  a 
corrupter  and  seducer.  Some  years  later,  in  his  Ecce  Homo 
he  represents  himself  as  portraying  Nietzsche  the  Philosopher, 
and  Nietzsche  the  Musician,  under  the  names  of  "Schopen- 
hauer" and  "Wagner." 

In  Human,  All-too-Human,  a  new  Nietzsche  appeared, 
one  who  would  purge  himself  of  all  inherited  ideals,  of  all 
faith  and  morals — a  writer  of  aphorisms,  thirteen  hundred 
of  them — some  of  them  profound,  some  full  of  folly  and 
madness  and  hate. 

In  The  Dawn  of  Day,  in  1881,  we  have  the  rudiments 
of  what  may  be  called  his  own  philosophy,  hidden  in  a 
vast  mass  of  aphorisms  dealing  with  as  many  subjects.  That 
philosophy  is  marked  by  its  hatred  for  Christianity.  He 
is  a  Julian  the  Apostate  of  the  19th  century:  "Christianity" 
has  developed  into  soft  moralism."  Another  marked  char- 
acteristic is  materialism.  The  materials  for  a  correct  philoso- 
phy are  to  be  found  only  in  "physiology  and  medicine."  An- 
other characteristic  is  zeal  for  eugenics;  and  still  another  is 
the  doctrine  of  an  eternal  recurrency,  which  he  thought  to 
be  original  with  him.  He  says  that  "with  this  book  he 
opened  his  campaign  against  morality."    Ecce  Homo,  p.  91). 

In  The  Joyful  Wisdom,  the  superman  is  brought  to  the 
fore,  the  man  who  shall  down  all  obstacles,  all  forces,  all 
weaker  men,  and  grow  stronger  and  stronger.  He  "dances 
freely  on  the  corpse  of  morality."     (See  Ecce  Homo,  p.  96). 

Thus  Spake  Zarathustra  was   written   and   published   in 


Some   Modern   Isms.  163 

1883  and  1884.  Having  thrown  behind  him  for  the  time  the 
hopeless  mechanism  of  the  eternal  recurrence,  he  affirms,  in 
the  earlier  portion  of  this  work,  clearly  the  ideal  of  the 
superman  as  a  goal  toward  which  all  master-men  should 
strive.  *7  teach  to  you  the  Superman.  Man  is  something 
that  is  to  be  surpassed.  What  have  ye  done  to  surpass 
man?  All  beings  hitherto  have  created  something  beyond 
themselves,  and  ye  want  to  be  the  ebb  of  that  great  tide, 
and  would  rather  go  back  to  the  beast  than  surpass  man? 
The  superman  is  the  meaning  of  the  earth.  Let  your  will 
say:  The  superman  shall  be  the  meaning  of  the  earth! 
I  conjure  you,  my  brethren,  remain  true  to  the  earth,  and 
believe  not  those  who  speak  unto  you  of  super-earthly  hopes." 
Later,  in  the  same  work,  his  chariot  wheels  are  clogged  by 
the  return  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Recurrence.  He 
jumbles  his  doctrine  of  immoral  Will  to  power  with  a 
doctrine  of  an  eternal  physical  round — the  physical  being 
the  all. 

This  work  he,  with  unmeasured  egotism,  pronounced  the 
deepest  book  and  the  greatest  g\i':  ever  granted  to  men. 

In  1886,  Beyond  Good  and  Evil,  a  ''Prelude  to  a  Philoso- 
phy of  the  Future" — his  teaching  as  a  whole  which  he 
planned  to  set  forth  as  a  system — was  published.  Interest- 
ing features  of  this  work  are  his  attitude  of  super-national- 
ism, his  anti-English  attitude.  He  says  of  the  English: 
"They  are  a  fundamentally  mediocre  species, 
ponderous,  conscience-stricken,  herding  animals."  Of  Shake- 
speare he  speaks  as  that  marvelous,  Spanish-Moorish-Saxon 
synthesis  of  taste,  over  whom  an  ancient  Athenian  of  tho 
circle  of  Aeschylus  would  have  half-killed  himself  with 
laughter  or  irritation,"  of  Carlyle,  as  "the  absurd  muddle- 
head."  In  his  own  view  "this  book  is  a  criticism  of  modern- 
ity, embracing  the  modern  sciences,  arts,  even  politics,  to- 
gether with  certain  indications  as  to  a  type  which  should 


164  Some   Modern    Isms, 

be  the  reverse  of  modern  man,  or  as  little  like  him  as 
possible."     (Ecce  Homo,  p.  113). 

Since  his  death  the  notes  intended  to  furnish  materials 
for  his  "The  Will  to  Power,"  have  been  published.  In 
this  work  he  had  set  out  to  show,  that  the  will  to  Power, 
and  not  the  struggle  for  existence  is  the  life  principle;  that 
socialism  is  the  tyranny  of  the  meanest  and  most  brainless; 
that  Christianity  is  the  greatest  curse  that  has  fallen  upon 
the  world;  that  English  philosophy  is  worthless  trash.  He 
was  thus  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  Super-man. 

In  his  "The  Genealogy  of  Morals,"  published  in  1887, 
Nietzsche  raises  the  question:  "Under  what  conditions  did 
Man  invent  for  himself  those  judgments  of  values,  Good 
and  Evil?  And  what  value  do  they  possess?  This  work 
contains  his  guesses  as  to  "evolution"  of  guilt,  bad  con- 
science, punishment,  mingled  with  insane  estimates  of  his 
own  powers  and  place.     (Cf.  Ecce  Homo,  p.  117). 

In  1888  we  have  his  The  Case  of  Wagner,  in  which  Wag- 
ner is  described  as  "an  actor  not  a  musician;  a  symptom  of 
impoverished  life,  a  clever  rattle-snake,  a  typical  decadent." 
On  the  heels  of  this  we  have  his  The  Twilight  of  Idols — a 
hilarious,  super-egotistical  bookj  in  which  he  knocks  Car- 
lyle,  and  all  free-thinking  moral  fanatics.  Next  came  his 
The  Antichrist,  in  which  he  represents  Christianity  as  "the 
one  great  curse,  the  one  enormous  and  innermost  perversion, 
the  one  great  instinct  of  revenge,  full  of  lies  and  more  dan- 
gerous to  life  than  any  other  religion.  Next  came  from  his 
pen  Ecce  Homo,  in  which  he  represents  himself  as  the  great- 
est of  men  to  date.  The  chapter  headings  are:  "Why  am  I 
so  wise?  Why  am  I  so  clever?  Why  write  I  such  excellent 
books?"  He  says:  "I  did  a  host  of  things  of  the  highest 
rank — things  that  no  man  can  do  nowadays."  .  .  .  "To 
take  up  my  books  is  one  of  the  rarest  honors  that  a  man  can 
pay  himself.  .  .  .  Before  my  time  there  was  no  psy- 
chology." 


Some    Modern   Isms.  165 

He  went  mad  in  January,  1889,  he  proclaimed  himself 
God. 

Before  long  his  aged  mother  began  caring  for  him  again. 
After  her  death  his  sister  took  him  in  charge.  He  con- 
tinued to  exist  till  August  25th,  1900. 

II.  What  did  he  dream  of  doing? 

Chiefly,  he  dreamed  of  leading  master-men  to  the  de- 
velopment of  the  superman.     Hear  him.     He  says: 

"My  life-task  is  to  prepare  for  humanity  one  supreme 
moment  in  which  it  can  come  to  its  senses,  a  Great  Noon 
in  which  it  will  turn  its  gaze  backwards  and  forwards,  in 
which  it  will  step  from  under  the  yoke  of  accident  and  of 
priests,  and  for  the  first  time  settle  the  question  of  the  "Why 
and  Wherefore  of  humanity  as  a  whole — this  life  taisk 
naturally  follows  out  of  the  conviction  that  mankind  does 
not  get  on  the  right  road  of  its  own  accord.  (Ecce  Homo, 
93,  I). 

"/  teach  yoii  the  Superman.  Man  is  something  that  is 
to  be  surpassed.  What  is  the  ape  to  man?  A  laughing- 
stock, a  thing  of  shame.  And  just  the  same  shall  man  be 
to  the  Superman:  a  laughing-stock,  a  thing  of  shame."  (Thus 
spaze  Zarathustra,  p.  6). 

"The  Superman  is  the  meaning  of  the  earth.  Let  your 
will  say :  The  Superman  shall  be  the  meaning  of  the  earth  1 
I  conjure  you,  my  brethren,  remain  true  to  the  earth,  and 
believe  not  those  who  speak  unto  you  of  super-earthly  hopes! 
Poisoners  are  they  whether  they  know  it  or  not."   {Ibid,  p.  7). 

"I  love  him  who  liveth  in  order  to  know,  and  seeketh  to 
know  in  order  that  the  Superman  may  hereafter  live.  I 
love  him  who  laboreth  and  inventeth  that  he  may  build  the 
house  for  the  Superman  and  prepare  for  him  earth,  animal 
and  plant."  {Ihid.,  p.  10).  "Lo,  I  am  a  herald  of  the 
lightning,  and  a  heavy  drop  out  of  the  cloud:  the  lightning, 
however,  is  the  Superman."   {Ibid,  p.  11). 


166  Some   Modern    Isms. 

He  would  lift  the  naturally  strong  to  greater  strength  and 
to  the  production  of  still  stronger  men — men  of  more  effi- 
cient bodies  and  more  efficient  minds — men  beyond  good  and 
evil — amoral  men,  using  without  scruple  any  means  to  ac- 
complish their  ends — greater  Borgias,  greater  Napoleons. 

He  talks  at  times  of  redeeming  men;  but  that  of  which 
he  thinks  is  developing  some  strong  men  into  power  and  the 
evolution  of  Superman. 

To  clear  the  way  for  a  development  of  an  amoral  race 
of  Supermen,  he  teaches  that  God  is  dead  and  that  the  uni- 
verse is  simple  energy,  "a  sea  of  forces  storming  and  raging 
in  itself,"  "forever  rolling  back  over  incalculable  ages  to 
recurrence  with  an  ebb  and  flow  of  its  forms" 
''world  of  eternal  self-creation,  of  eternal  self-destruction" 
.  without  aim  unless  there  is  an  aim  in  the  bliss  of 
the  circle;  without  will,  unless  a  ring  must  by  nature  keep 
good  will  to  itself;"  that  "This  world  is  .  .  .  the 
Will  to  Power — and  nothing  else"  (Will  to  Power,  IL, 
431); — a  clock  running  down  and,  of  its  self-  self-winding 
to  the  same  recurrence;  and  that  the  ethical  prison  house 
built  on  faith  in  God  has  been  demolished  (Joyful  Wisdom, 
167);  that  master  men  may  therefore  do  anything  neces- 
sary, and  that  they  should  do  everything  and  suffer  every 
hardship  in  order,  to  the  fuller,  more  powerful  life  of  the 
Supermen;  that  they  should  court  danger  and  adventure, 
overcome  pity,  and  that  they  should  above  all  be  valorous. 

He  says  of  his  disciples:  To  such  ...  "I  wish 
suffering,  desolation,  sickness,  ill-treatment,  indignities  of 
all  kinds.  I  wish  them  to  be  acquainted  with  profound  self- 
contempt,  with  the  martyrdom  of  self-distrust,  with  the  mis- 
ery of  the  defeated;  I  have  no  pity  for  them:  because  I 
wish  them  to  have  the  only  thing  which  today  proves  whether 
a  man  has  any  value  or  not,  namely,  the  capacity  of  stick- 
ing   to    his    guns."   (Will    to    Power,    IL,    333).       (Here 


Some   Modern   Isms.  167 

Nietzsche  borrows  the  Christian  doctrine  of  suffering  as  a 
means  of  developing  holy  character;  perverts  it  and  prosti- 
tutes it  .  .  .  to  a  place  in  his  doctrine  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  Superman). 

To  stick  to  one's  guns  through  thick  and  thin  is  to  be  a 
mighty  incarnation  of  Will  to  Power,  which  is  the  one  real- 
ity. This  is  to  be  a  mighty  man,  it  is  to  help  bring  into 
being  the  Superman. 

But  this  exhortation  to  develop  the  Superman  is  a  thing 
to  which  Nietzsche  is  logically  incompetent.  In  his  sys- 
tem individuals  have  no  reality.  At  best  they  are  soap- 
bubbles  blown  by  the  Will  to  Power,  they  are  what  they  are 
because  of  the  eternal  energy;  the  Superman  himself  is 
but  a  large  and  highly  colored  soap  bubble.  As  the  wheels 
of  the  universe  turn,  he  will  come  of  necessity  if  he  come 
at  all.     He  has  come  if  he  is  to  come. 

His  attacks  on  "decadent  ethics,"  "ethics  as  set  forth  by 
Schopenhauer,  Kant,  or  Christ,  because  forsooth  they  are  a 
"no-saying  to  life,"  a  crushing  of  Will  to  Power,"  "a  curb- 
ing of  the  strong  in  favor  of  the  weak"— all  these  attacks  are 
practical  denials,  of  his  doctrine  that  there  is  only  one  real- 
ity— the  blind  will  to  power;  and  that  therefore  men  are  but 
bubbles  upon  the  current  of  life  or  the  Will  to  Power.  He 
forgot  in  them  the  half  of  his  teaching. 

Overlook  for  the  time  this  conflict  between  his  views  of 
what  men  ought  to  do,  and  their  being  no  men  to  do  those 
things,  forget  not  that  he  claims  as  his  mission,  the  holding 
forth  the  Superman  as  the  ideal  which  strong  men  should 
strive  to  produce.  He  held,  also,  that  in  order  to  the  in- 
bringing  of  Supermen  the  strong  need  protection  against 
the  jealousy  of  the  weak  who  are  powerful  in  numbers. 
"The  end  can  be  reached  only  by  securing  a  ruling  race, 
or  class,  and  by  such  subordination  and  breeding  as  will 
keep  the  individualities  strong."    This  ruling  class,  in  train- 


168  Some   Modern   Isms. 

ing  itself,  must  be  Spartan,  and  must  shrink  at  nothing,  set 
aside  old  rules  of  morals,  regard  morality  as  existing  only 
for  the  mediocre — the  herd,  the  world.  The  world  is  run- 
ning to  the  mediocre — but  there  is  at  present  a  master  caste 
of  free  adventurous  spirits,  defining  itself  ever  more  plainly. 
They  prepare  the  way  for  the  Superman. 

They  (the  Supermen)  are  to  have  no  more  sympathy  for 
common  men  than  we  have  for  the  pigs  we  eat.  They  will 
live  aloof  from  the  common  men — in  lonely  grandeur.  They 
"will  retranslate  the  word  good  into  its  older  and  more 
pagan  equivalents,  notable,  proud,  courageous,  barbarous." 
They  will  be  free  of  morals — amoral — save  that  they  must 
be  courageous,  self-controlled.  They  will  be  adventurous, 
fine  in  manners,  able  to  command. 

Recruited  upon  blood  and  training,  resting  upon  a  slave 
system,  kept  pure  by  eugenic  methods,  they  will  develop 
forms  of  culture  higher  than  anything  hitherto  known — and 
carry  forward  the  work  of  the  Romans  as  they  might  have 
carried  it  had  it  not  been  for  the  curse  of  Christianity.  They 
will  not  be  the  servants  but  the  masters  of  society. 

The  production  of  these  lords  is  worth  all  it  will  cost  in 
blood  and  suffering  and  servitude  of  the  weak,  he  teaches. 
The  Superman  will  take  what  he  wants  and  let  others  have 
as  and  only  as  he  pleases.  His  development  Nietzsche 
longs  for.  He  is  said  to  have  declared  that  the  Kaiser  Wil- 
"helm  II.  would  understand  the  Will  to  Power. 

Again,  we  remark  the  utter  illogical  character,  the  in- 
compatibles,  of  his  teaching:  The  Superman  ought  to  be 
produced.  Master  Spirits  must  work  for  his  production. 
But  there  is  nothing  new;  things  are  eternally  recurring.  The 
Supermen  that  have  not  been,  have  been.     So  Nietzsche. 

His  teaching  is  as  full  of  incompatibles  as  Mrs.  Eddy's. 
There  is  no  good,  no  bad  for  master  men;  courage  is  of 
moral   worth,   all   other   qualities   are  without  moral  value. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  169 

"Live  dangerously,"  live  differently  from  others.  Be  a  big, 
tiger  among  all  the  tigers  of  earth.  So  live  as  to  develop 
a  race  of  super-tigers,  is  Nietzsche  put  baldly.  Everything 
that  is  to  be,  it  has  been;  and  what  has  been  will  be. 

III.  Nietzsche's  Attitude  Toward  Christianity. 

So  far  as  it  is  a  doctrine  of  a  life  beyond  this,  Nietzsche 
regarded  Christianity  as  a  pack  of  lies.  As  a  way  of  life, 
a  system  of  ethics,  he  regarded  it  as  the  worst  curse  which 
man  has  incurred.  He  regarded  it  as  one  of  his  own  most 
original  services  to  estimate  Christian  ethics  as  he  did. 

He  says  in  Ecce  Homo: 

"No  one  hitherto  has  felt  Christian  morality  beneath  him; 
to  that  end  there  were  needed  height;  remoteness  of  vision, 
and  an  abysmal  psychological  depth  not  believed  to  be  possi- 
ble hitherto.  Up  to  the  present.  Christian  morality  has  been 
the  Circe  of  all  thinkers — they  stood  at  her  service.  What 
man  before  my  time  has  descended  into  the  underground 
caverns  from  out  of  which  the  poisonous  fumes  of  this  ideal — 
of  this  slandering  of  the  world,  burst  forth?"  (Ecce  Homo, 
138). 

"What  separates  us,  is  not  that  we  do  not  rediscover  any 
God,  either  in  history  or  in  nature  or  behind  nature — but 
that  we  recognize  what  was  worshipped  as  God  not  as 
"divine,"  but  as  pitiable,  as  absurd,  as  injurious — not  only 
as  an  error,  but  as  a  crime  against  life.  We  deny  God  as 
God.  If  this  God  of  the  Christians  were  proved  to  us,  we 
should  still  less  know  how  to  believe  in  him.  In  a  formula : 
Deus  qualem  Paulus  creavit,  Dei  negatio."   (Antichrist,  316). 

"That  which  defines  me,  that  which  makes  me  stand 
apart  from  the  whole  rest  of  humanity  is  the  fact  that  I 
unmasked  Christian  morality  .  .  .  Christian  morality 
is  the  most  malignant  form  of  all  falsehood,  the  actual  Circe 
of  humanity,  that  which  has  corrupted  mankind."  (Ecce 
Homo,  139). 


170  Some   Modern   Isms. 

It  is  worth  remarking  that  the  God  Nietzsche  fights  against 
and  whose  ethics  he  despises  is  not  the  God  of  the  Bible, 
but  the  caricature  of  Him  set  up  by  modern  German  theo- 
logians, and  his  ethics  a  caricature  of  Bible  ethics  made  by 
multitudes  of  modern  Christians,  and  these  caricatures  of 
God  and  ethics  vitiated  and  caricatured  still  further  by 
Nietzsche  himself,  at  the  dictate  of  his  theory  of  Will  to 
Power.  Naturally  no  man  was  more  given  to  caricature, 
since  for  him  truth  was  "only  useful  illusion."  Hear  him 
further : 

''Whenever  the  will  to  power  declines  in  any  way,  there 
is  always  a  physiological  retrogression,  a  decadence.  The 
deity  of  decadence  pruned  of  his  manliest  virtues  and  im- 
pulses, henceforth,  becomes  necessarily  the  God  of  the  phy- 
siologically retrograde,  the  weak.  They  do  not  call  them- 
selves the  weak,  they  call  themselves  the  good. 
How  can  one  defer  so  much  to  the  simplicity  of  Christian 
theologians  as  to  decree  with  them  that  the  continuous  de- 
velopment of  God  from  the  "God  of  Israel,  from  the  national 
God  to  the  Christian  God,  to  the  essence  of  everything  good, 
is  a  progress?  But  so  does  even  Renan.  .  .  .  It  is 
just  the  very  opposite  that  strikes  the  eye.  When  the  pre- 
suppositions of  ascending  life,  when  everything  strong,  brave, 
domineering  and  proud  has  been  eliminated  out  of  the  con- 
cept of  God,  when  he  sinks  step  by  step  to  the  symbol  of  a 
staff  for  the  fatigued,  a  sheet  anchor  for  all  drowning  ones, 
when  he  becomes  the  poor  people's  God,  the  sinner's  God, 
the  God  of  the  sick  par  excellence  and  when  predicate  of 
the  Savior  is  left  as  the  sole  divine  predicate,  what  does 
such  a  change  speak  of?  Such  a  reduction  of  the  divine? 
To  be  sure  the  kingdom  of  God  has  thereby  become  greater. 
Formerly  he  had  only  his  'chosen  people.'  Since  then  he 
has  gone  abroad  in  his  travels,  quite  like  his  people  itself, 
since  then  he  has  never  again  settled  down  quietly  in  any 


Some    Modern    Isms.  171 

place,  until  he  has  finally  become  at  home  everywhere,  the 
great  'Cosmopolitan' — till  he  has  gained  over  'the  great 
number,'  and  the  half  of  the  earth  to  his  side.  But  the 
God  of  the  'great  number,'  the  democrat  among  the  Gods, 
became  nevertheless,  no  proud  pagan  God,  he  remained  a 
Jew,  he  remained  the  God  of  the  woods,  the  God  of  all 
dark  corners,  and  of  all  unhealthy  quarters  throughout  the 
world.  .  .  .  His  world  empire  is  still,  as  formerly  an 
underworld  empire,  a  hospital,  a  subterranean  empire,  a 
Ghetto  empire.  .  .  .  And  he  himself,  so  pale,  so  weak, 
so  decadent.  Even  the  palest  of  the  pale  still  become  master 
over  him — the  Metaphysicians,  the  conceptual  Albinos.  They 
spun  around  about  him  so  long,  until  hypnotized  by  their 
movements  he  became  a  cob-web-spinner,  a  meta-physician 
himself.  Henceforth,  he  spun  the  world  anew  out  of  him- 
self— sub  specie  Spinozae — henceforth  he  transfigured  him- 
self always  into  the  thinner  and  paler,  he  became  'ideal,' 
he  became  'pure  spirit,'  he  became  'absolutism,'  he  became 
'thing  in  itself,'  ruin  of  a  God.  .  .  .  God  became  thing 
in  itself. 

"The  Christian  concept  of  God — God  as  God  of  the 
sick,  God  as  cob-web  spinner,  God  as  spirit — is  one  of  the 
most  corrupt  concepts  of  God  ever  arrived  at  on  earth;  it 
represents  perhaps  the  low-water  in  the  descending  develop- 
ment of  the  God-type — God  degenerated  to  the  contradiction 
of  life,  instead  of  being  its  transfiguration  and  its  eternal 
yea!  .  .  .  .  God  as  the  formula  for  every  calumny  of 
'this  world,'  for  every  lie  of  'another  world.'  In  God  noth- 
ingness deified,  the  will  to  nothingness  declared  holy!" 

"This  hybrid  image  of  ruin  derived  from  nullity,   con- 
cept, and  contradiction,  in  which  all  decadent  instincts,  all 
cowardices,    and    lassitudes    of   soul    have    their   sanction." 
(Antichrist,  260-2). 
Thus  he  mixes  the  Bible  conception  of  God  with  every 


172  Some    Modern    Isms. 

nominally  Christian  speculator's  conception  of  God — cari- 
catures the  God  of  the  Scriptures.  Thus  deals  he  with  the 
morals  of  the  Scriptures.  He  treats  with  contempt  his  cari- 
catures, deservedly.  No  doubt  he  hated  also  the  Scriptural 
elements  in  his  caricature  with  intense  hatred.  Had  he,  in- 
stead of  caricaturing  the  true  God  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
criticizing  that,  confined  his  polemics  to  the  misconceptions 
of  God  by  philosophic  speculators,  and  the  theological  and 
popular  misconceptions  of  God  by  which  He  is  turned  into 
a  goody-goody  old  grandmother,  or  into  some  other  such 
idol,  Nietzsche's  work  would  have  had  its  value;  but  he 
hates  every  glimpse  he  gets  of  God  as  revealed  in  Christ 
and  bedevils  Him,  while  he  is  laughing  to  scorn  these  fancies 
as  to  what  God  is  like.  He  hates  Christian  morals  as 
boulders  in  the  way  of  the  ruthless  struggle  of  the  strong 
man  to  develop  the  Superman. 

He  holds  that  Christianity  is  the  weapon  with  which  the 
slave  races  have  conquered  their  captors — the  strong  men. 
Hence  he  hates  it — every  shade  of  it  which  he  has  caught 
sight  of.  Holding  that  morality  is  the  denial  of  the  Will 
to  Power,  he  vomits  venom  on  what  he  takes  for  Christian- 
ity— Christian  ethics. 

For  the  Christian  conceptions  of  right  and  wrong  he  would 
substitute  radically  different  conceptions.  Power,  satisfied, 
triumphant,  embodied  in  a  conquering  race,  "the  splendid 
blond  beast,"  calls  all  its  own  characteristics  good.  Good 
meant  in  the  first  instance  the  quality  of  a  ruling  class.  It 
is  the  same  as  noble  and  implies  courage  and  enduring  will, 
pride  and  self-sufficiency.  Its  opposite  is  the  character  of 
the  enslaved  people,  base,  mean,  villainous.  Thus  goodness 
has  nothing  to  do  with  love,  humility,  justice,  or  self-denial. 
These  qualities  are  displayed  by  the  down-trodden  or  at 
least  admired  by  them.  Do  unto  others  as  you  would  have 
them  do  unto  you  is  the  maxim  of  the  herd,  the  helot,  the 
outcast,  the  Chandala. 


Some   Modern   Isms.  173 

According  to  Nietzsche:  "Morality  is  the  idiosyncracy 
of  the  decadent  revenging  themselves  upon  life."  This  pe- 
culiarity reached  its  highest  incarnation  in  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, who  asserted  the  superiority  before  God  of  the  'poor, 
the  maimed,  the  halt,  the  blind,'  and  denied  the  claims  of 
the  rulers;  and  by  his  crucifixion  and  the  doctrine  of  his 
resurrection  and  reign  as  risen  Savior,  secured  for  two  mil- 
lenniums the  triumph  of  slave  morality."  Nietzsche  holds 
that  the  world  was  in  a  state  at  the  time  of  Christ  that  fav- 
ored the  triumph  of  this  morality,  that  multitudes  of  slaves 
filled  the  Empire,  that  they  eagerly  fell  in  with  it  as  a 
system  which  would  restore  their  dignity,  that  the  mixture 
of  races  throughout  the  Empire  brought  with  it  a  physio- 
logical depression,  which  mistaken  for  a  sense  of  sin,  made 
men  eager  for  a  salvation  cult;  that  Socrates  and  Plato,  the 
great  "Greek  decadents,"  had  long  corrupted  the  pagan  mind 
with  notions  of  goodness,  justice,  and  the  eternal  world, 
that  a  dozen  other  tendencies  wrought  together  to  secure 
the  triumph  of  this  system  over  the  Pagan  Empire,  "the 
proudest  and  most  valuable  organization  of  the  Will  to 
Power,  which  the  world  had  known  to  that  time;  that  this 
victory  of  morality  is  the  victory  of  decadence;  that  "ascend- 
ing life  is  ever  pitiless  and  proud;"  that  Christian  morality 
is  useful  for  the  herd,  making  life  tolerable  for  them;  and 
to  be  tolerated  among  the  herd  by  strong  men  that  the  herd 
may  be  more  content  to  serve  as  slaves  of  the  strong;  but 
that  the  strong  should  develop  into  the  amoral  class. 

Nietzsche,  as  is  clear  from  the  above  statements,  either 
misunderstood,  or  deliberately  misrepresented  the  Christian- 
ity of  the  New  Testament.  He  perhaps  never  had  any  real 
comprehension  of  it,  having  been  brought  up  only  in  the 
soulless  externalities  of  the  type  of  Christianity  prevailing 
in  Germany  in  his  early  years.  It  is  certain  that  he  aposta- 
tized from  the  type  with  Vv'hich  he  was  acquainted  with  all 


174  Some    Modern    Isms. 

the  energy  of  a  Julian  the  Apostate.  We  are  not  grieved 
at  his  attacks  on  much  of  what  he  supposes  to  be  Christian- 
ity. Let  him  vent  his  venom  on  the  ethics  of  Strauss,  or 
Schopenhauer,  or  the  ethics  of  the  downy  beds  of  ease  Chris- 
tians, we  shall  not  raise  a  hand  in  defense;  but  his  con- 
fusing of  the  true  Christian  ethics  with  these  isms,  and  his 
attacks  on  genuine  elements  of  the  Christian  ethics  should 
be  countered. 

Remark : 

1st.  He  is  false  in  representing  Christian  ethics  as  work- 
ing toward  decadence  in  those  under  its  influence.  The  New 
Testament  says:  "Quit  you  like  men:  be  strong."  It  says: 
"Endure  hardness  as  good  soldiers."  Given  to  the  decay- 
ing, rotting,  Greeco-Roman  world,  it  gave  hope  and  courage 
to  that  world,  helped  to  develop  masterful  spirits  in  that 
world.  True  it  developed,  regard  for  the  rights  of  others, 
justice,  love,  and  humility  before  the  infinitely  perfect,  sweet- 
ness of  disposition;  but  these  qualities  are  compatible  with 
strength.  Nietzsche  should  have  acquainted  himself  with 
Puritanism  of  the  sixteenth  and  the  seventeenth  centuries 
in  Great  Britain  and  the  Netherlands.  Had  his  prejudices 
against  the  English  allowed  him  to  see  at  all,  he  would  have 
seen  a  type  of  Christianity,  nearer  to  the  ideal  set  up  in  the 
Scriptures  and  that  it  was  making  strong  men.  He  would 
have  seen  that  it  was  giving  a  dignity  to  these  men,  turning 
them  into  "a  holy  nation,  and  a  royal  priesthood,  a  peculiar 
people."  A  fair  study  of  the  Christian  ethics  would  have 
shown  him  that  in  the  two-fold  end  it  assigns  to  man,  one 
element  is  his  own  well-being.  This  fair  study  would  have 
shown  him  that  Christianity  is  a  "yea-saying,"  to  use  his 
own  jargon,  to  life,  to  every  thing  approvable  in  man,  and 
a  "nay  saying"  only  to  what  ought  to  die.  That  he  is  false 
in  teaching  that  Christianity  cultivates  only  anaemic  vir- 
tues is  shown  by  such    products    as    Cromwell,    Gustavus 


Some    Modern    Isms.  175 

Adolphus,  R.  E.  Lee,  Stonewall  Jackson,  Chinese  Gordon, 
and  the  great  leaders  and  the  great  led  of  the  Aglo-Saxons 
and  their  allies  of  today. 

2d.  Nietzsche  is  false  in  representing  Christian  ethics  as 
purely  altruistic.  Nominally  Christian  ethical  philosophers, 
here  and  there,  may  present  systems  of  pure  altruism;  such 
is  not  the  Christian  system.  That  system  teaches  to  love 
one's  neighbors  as  ourselves.  There  is  a  legitimate  love  of 
self  and  it  is  given  a  distinct  place.  Moreover,  in  Christian 
ethics,  a  distinction  is  made  between  the  love  of  benevolence 
and  the  love  of  moral  approbation,  and  men  are  taught  to 
stand  with  iron  strength  against  being  swayed  by  mere  be- 
nevolence to  go  against  the  right.  Christianity  frowns  on 
the  doting  indulgence  of  the  grandmamma,  and  holds  to 
the  fore  that  love  which  is  heroically  controlled  by  regard 
to  inexorable  and  eternal  right. 

3d.  Nietzsche  is  false  in  representing  Christianity  as  op- 
posed to  culture.  Historical  Christianity  has  not  been  op- 
posed to  culture.  The  Christian  culture  has  been  the  noblest 
in  the  world.  New  Testament  Christianity  is  not  opposed  to 
the  culture  of  the  best  and  highest  in  man.  It  does  oppose 
all  pandering  to  unworthy  lusts. 

4th.  Neitzsche  is  false  in  representing  Christianity  as  teach- 
ing that  all  men  are  equal  before  God — that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  aristocracy  of  character.  So  far  is  this  from  the 
truth,  that  Christianity  teaches  that  there  are  different  de- 
grees of  excellence  of  character,  both  on  earth  and  in  heaven. 
The  New  Testament  never  asserts  an  identity  of  gifts  for  all 
men.  It  affirms  the  contrary.  Not  all  are  Pauls,  or  Peters. 
The  New  Testament  does  indeed  assert  the  worth  of  every 
individual  and  vindicates  to  him  certain  rights;  but  it  subor- 
dinates some  to  others,  e.  g.,  in  the  home,  and  in  the 
state,  and  in  the  Church.  It  represents  Christians  as  having 
gifts  differing  according  to  the  grac^  eiven  unto  them. 


176  Some   Modern   Isms. 

5th.  Nietzsche  would  substitute  for  Christianity — a  way 
of  life  that  would  result  in  the  development  of  Napoleans 
and  Borgias.  In  denying  that  it  is  adapted  to  the  de- 
velopment of  such  monsters  as  he  would  develop,  he  pays 
the  highest  tribute  possible  for  him  to  Christianity.  In 
speaking  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  a  "decadent,"  a  "madman," 
"the  most  ill-natured  of  all  men,  suffering  from  a  lunatic 
pride  which  delighted  in  humility,"  he  writes  himself  down 
as  a  decadent,  as  insane,  as  full  of  the  poison  of  asps,  as 
a  bladder  blown  with  gas  of  Hell's  own  make.  (See  Anti- 
christ, pp.  314,  316). 

6th.  Nietzsche  denies  what  Christianity  affirms,  the  rights 
of  man  as  man.  He  teaches  that  the  Master  man  may  use 
as  he  would  a  hoe  or  spade  or  steam-engine,  any  other  man 
weaker  than  himself — without  regard  to  any  so-called  rights 
in  that  other.  Your  conscience  and  mine  condemn  this 
utterly.  Nietzsche  has  no  Gospel  for  the  poor,  for  the  vast 
majority  of  men.  He  has  for  them  only  a  message  of  con- 
tempt. 

IV.  Where  did  Nietzsche  get  the  stuff  which  he  belched 
forth  against  Christianity  and  in  advocacy  of  the  onbring- 
ing  of  the  Superman  ? 

He  claimed  that  he  got  it  by  "Inspiration."     Hear  him: 

"Has  any  one  at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  any 
distinct  notion  of  what  poets  of  a  stronger  age  understood 
by  the  word  inspiration?  If  not,  I  will  describe  it.  If 
one  had  the  smallest  vestige  of  superstition  left  in  one,  it 
would  hardly  be  possible  completely  to  set  aside  the  idea 
that  one  is  the  mere  incarnation,  mouthpiece,  or  medium  of 
an  almighty  power.  The  idea  of  revelation,  in  the  sense 
that  something  which  profoundly  convulses  and  upsets  one 
becomes  suddenly  visible  and  audible  with  indescribable 
certainty  and  accuracy,  describes  the  simple  fact.  One  hears 
— one  does  not  seek — one  takes — one  does  not  ask  who  gives; 


Some   Modern    Isms.  177 

a  thought  suddenly  flashes  up  like  lightning,  it  comes  with 
necessity,  without  faltering — I  have  never  had  any  choice 
in  the  matter.  There  is  an  ecstacy  so  great  that  the  im- 
mense strain  of  it  is  sometimes  relaxed  by  a  flood  of  tears, 
during  which  one's  steps  now  involuntarily  rush  and  now 
involuntarily  lag.  There  is  the  feeling  that  one  is  utterly 
out  of  hand  with  the  very  distinct  consciousness  of  an  end- 
less number  of  fine  thrills  and  titillations  descending  to  one's 
very  toes;  there  is  a  depth  of  happiness  in  which  the  most 
painful  and  gloomy  parts  do  not  act  as  antitheses  to  the 
rest,  but  are  produced  and  required  as  necessary  shades  of 
color  in  such  an  overflow  of  light.  There  is  an  instinct  for 
rhythmic  relations  which  embraces  a  whole  world  of  forms 
(length,  the  need  of  a  wide  embracing  rhythm,  is  almost  the 
measure  of  the  force  of  an  inspiration,  a  sort  of  counterpart 
to  its  pressure  and  tension).  Everything  happens  quite  in- 
voluntarily as  if  in  a  tempestuous  outburst  of  freedom,  of 
absoluteness,  of  power  and  divinity.  The  involuntary  nature 
of  the  figures  and  similes  is  the  most  remarkable  thing;  one 
loses  all  perception  of  what  is  imagery  and  metaphor,  every- 
thing seems  to  present  itself  as  the  readiest,  truest  and 
simplest  means  of  expression.  It  actually  seems  to  use  one 
of  Zarathustra's  own  phrases,  as  if  all  things  come  to  one 
and  offered  themselves  as  similes.  ("Here  do  all  things 
come  caressingly  to  thy  discourse  and  flatter  thee,  for  they 
would  fain  ride  upon  thy  back.  On  every  simile  thou  ridest 
here  unto  every  truth.  Here  fly  open  unto  thee  all  the 
speech  and  word  shrines  of  the  world,  here  would  all  exist- 
ence become  speech,  here  would  all  becoming  learn  of  thee 
how  to  speak.")  This  is  my  experience  of  inspiration.  I 
do  not  doubt  but  that  I  should  have  to  go  back  thousands 
of  years  before  I  could  find  another  who  could  say  to  me: 
'It  is  mine  also!'     (Ecce  Homo,  101-103). 

"This  work  (Thus  Spake  Zarathustra)  stands  alone.     Do 


178  Some    Modern    Isms. 

not  let  us  mention  the  poets  in  the  same  breath.     Nothing 
perhaps  has  ever  been  produced  out  of  such  a  super-abund- 
ance of  strength.     My  concept  'Dionysian'  here  becomes  the 
highest  deed;  compared  with  it,  everything  that  other  men 
have  done  seems  poor  and  limited.     The  fact  that  a  Goethe 
or  a  Shakespeare  would  not  for  an  instant  have  known  how 
to  take  breath  in  this  atmosphere  of  poison  and  the  heights; 
the  fact  that  by  the  side  of  Zarathustra,  Dante  is  no  more 
than  a  believer,  and  not  one  who  first  creates  the  truth — 
that  is  to  say  not  a  world-ruling  spirit,   a  Fate;  the  fact 
that  the  poets  of  the  Veda  were  priests  and  not  even  fit  to 
unfasten  Zarasthustra's  sandal — all  this  is  the  least  of  things 
and  gives  no  idea  of  the  distance,  of  the  azure  solitude  in 
which  this  work  dwells.      .      .      .      If  all  the  spirit  and 
goodness   of   every   great   soul   were   collected   together,   the 
whole  could  not  create  a  single  one  of  Zarathustra's  dis- 
courses.    .      .      .     Until  his  coming  no  one  knew  what  was 
height  or  depth  and  still  less  what  was  truth.     There  is  not 
a  single  passage  in  this  revelation  of  truth  which  had  al- 
ready been  anticipated  and  divined  by  even  the  greatest  of 
men.     Before  Zarathustra  there  was  no  wisdom,  no  probing 
of  the  soul,  no  art  of  speech;  in  his  book  the  most  familiar 
and  the  most  vulgar  thing  utters  unheard  of  words.     The 
sentence  quivers  with  passion.    Eloquence  has  become  music. 
Forks  of  lightning  are  hurled  towards  futures  of  which  no 
one  has  ever  dreamed  before.     The  most  powerful  use  of 
parables  that  has  ever  existed  is  poor  beside  it,  and  mere 
child's  play  compared  with  this  return  of  language  to  the 
nature  of  imagery.   (Ecce  Homo,  106-108.) 
Hear  a  sample  of  this  revelation: 

"With  the  new  morning,  however,  there  came  unto  me  a 
new  truth:  then  did  I  learn  to  say:  'Of  what  account  to 
me  are  market-place  and  populace  and  populace-noise  and 
long  populace-ears!' 


Some   Modern   Isms.  179 

"Ye  higher  men,  learn  this  from  me:  On  the  market- 
place no  one  believeth  in  higher  men.  But  if  ye  will  speak 
there,  very  well!  The  populace,  however,  blinketh:  'We 
are  all  equal.' 

"  'Ye  higher  men' — so  blinketh  the  populace — 'there  are 
no  higher  men,  we  are  all  equal;  man  is  man,  before  God — 
we  are  all  equal ! ' 

"Before  God! — Now,  however,  this  God  hath  died.  Be- 
fore the  populace,  however,  we  will  not  be  equal.  Ye  higher 
men,  away  from  the  market-place. 

"Before  God! — Now  however  this  God  hath  died!  Ye 
higher  men,  this  God  was  your  greatest  danger. 

"Only  since  he  lay  in  the  grave  have  ye  again  arisen. 
Now  only  cometh  the  great  noontide,  now  only  doth  the 
higher  man  become — master! 

"Have  ye  understood  this  word,  O  my  brethren?  Ye 
are  frightened:  do  your  hearts  turn  giddy?  Doth  the  abyss 
here  yawn  for  you?     Doth  the  hell-hound  here  yelp  at  you? 

"Well!  Take  heart!  ye  higher  men!  Now  only  travail- 
eth  the  mountain  of  the  human  future.  God  hath  died;  now 
do  we  desire — the  Superman  to  live.     .      .      . 

"The  most  careful  ask  today:  'How  is  man  to  be  main- 
tained?' Zarathustra  however  asketh,  as  the  first  and  only 
one:     'How  is  man  to  be  surpassed?' 

"The  Superman,  I  have  at  heart;  that  is  the  first  and 
only  thing  to  me — and  not  man;  not  the  neighbour,  not  the 
poorest,  not  the  sorriest,  not  the  best — 

"O  my  brethren,  what  I  can  love  in  man  is  that  he  is 
an  over-going  and  a  down-going.  And  also  in  you  there 
is  much  that  maketh  me  love  and  hope. 

"In  that  ye  have  despised,  ye  higher  men,  that  maketh 
me  hope.     For  the  great  despisers  are  the  great  reverers. 

"In  that  ye  have  despaired,  there  is  much  to  honour.  For 
ye  have  not  learned  to  submit  yourselves,  ye  have  not  learned 
petty  policy. 


ISO  Some    Modern    Isms. 

"For  today  have  the  petty  people  become  master:  they 
all  preach  submission  and  humility  and  policy  and  diligence 
and  consideration  and  the  long  et  cetera  of  petty  virtues. 

"Whatever  is  of  the  effeminate  type,  whatever  originateth 
from  the  servile  type,  and  especially  the  populace-mismash — 
that  wisheth  now  to  be  master  of  all  human  destiny — O  dis- 
gust !     Disgust !     Disgust ! 

"That  asketh  and  asketh  and  never  tireth:  'How  is  man 
to  maintain  himself  best,  longest,  most  pleasantly?'  There- 
by— are  they  the  masters  of  today. 

"These  masters  of  today — surpass  them,  O  my  brethren — 
these  petty  people :  they  are  the  Superman's  greatest  danger ! 

"Surpass,  ye  higher  men,  the  petty  virtues,  the  petty  policy, 
the  sand-grain  considerateness,  the  ant-hill  trumpery,  the 
pitiable  comfortableness,  the  'happiness  of  the  greatest  num- 
ber!' 

"And  rather  despair  than  submit  yourselves.  And  verily, 
I  love  you,  because  ye  know  not  today  how  to  live,  ye  higher 
men!     For  thus  do  ye  live — best!     . 

"Have  ye  courage,  O  my  brethren?  Are  ye  stout-hearted? 
Not  the  courage  before  witnesses,  but  anchorite  and  eagle 
courage,  which  not  even  a  God  any  longer  beholdeth? 

"Cold  souls,  mules,  the  blind  and  the  drunken,  I  do  not 
call  stout-hearted.  He  hath  heart  who  knoweth  fear,  but 
vanquisheth  it;  who  seeth  the  abyss,  but  with  pride. 

"He  who  seeth  the  abyss,  but  with  eagle's  eyes — he  who 
with  eagle's  talons  graspeth  the  abyss:   he  hath  courage. 

"  'Man  is  evil' — so  said  to  me  for  consolation,  all  the 
wisest  ones.  Ah,  if  only  it  be  still  true  today!  For  the 
evil  is  man's  best  force. 

"  'Man  must  become  better  and  eviler' — so  do  I  teach. 
The  evilest  is  necessary  for  the  Superman's  best. 

"It  may  have  been  well  for  the  preacher  of  the  petty 
people  to  suffer  and  be  burdened  by  men's  sin.  I,  however, 
rejoice  in  great  sin  as  my  great  consolation. 


Some    Modern    Isms.  181 

"Such  things,  however,  are  not  said  for  long  ears.  Every 
word,  also,  is  not  suited  for  every  mouth.  These  are  fine, 
far-away  things:  at  them  sheep's  claws  shall  not  grasp!" 
Thus  spake  Zarathustra,  pp.  350-353. 

The  contents  of  his  writings,  notwithstanding  his  extrava- 
gant claims,  include  nothing  original.  "His  works  are  a 
veritable  whispering  gallery  of  literary  echoes"  (Figgis,  169). 
He  borrowed  from  Machiavelli  and  Gobineau,  from  many 
strains  of  German  literature  (Thiele),  from  those  Scriptures 
which  he  abhorred,  from  La  Rochefoucauld,  from  Luther, 
Zoroaster.  As  for  his  originality  in  philosophy,  M.  Fouillee 
writes  (International  Journal  of  Ethics,  1903,  p.  13): 
"Nietzsche  has  not  the  supreme  originality  which  he  claims 
for  himself.  Mix  Greek  sophistry  and  Greek  scepticism  with 
the  materialism  of  Hobbes  and  the  monism  of  Schopenhauer, 
corrected  with  the  paradoxes  of  Rousseau  and  of  Diderot' 
and  the  result  will  be  the  philosophy  of  Zarathustra." 
He  writes  again:  "He  fancies  himself  secure  from  the 
prejudices  which  emanate  from  the  "herd,"  or  are  due  to 
environment,  and  yet  no  one  more  than  this  singer  of  the 
praises  of  force  and  of  war  has  gathered  together  into  a 
single  heap  all  the  gregarious  prejudices  from  Germany 
still  feudal  in  the  midst  of  the  nineteenth  century,  all  those 
dominant  ideas  which  spring  from  the  race,  the  environment 
and  the  moment,  and  combined  with  them  corresponding 
ideas  from  antiquity,  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  Renaissance" 
(Ibid,  17). 

He  was  a  man  of  violent  admirations;  and  is  found  ap- 
propriating, unconsciously  from  each  of  the  personages  to 
whom  for  the  time  he  was  a  devotee.  One  day  he  is  Wag- 
nerite,  the  next,  under  the  influence  of  Paul  Ree,  the  day 
following  the  disciple  of  Darwin,  and  on  the  subsequent  day 
bubbling  with  enthusiasm  over  Schopenhauer,  and  on  a 
still  later  day  decrying  Kant  and  borrowing  from  him  in  cr.e 


182  Some    Modern    Isms. 

breath. 

No  man  had  more  contempt  for  the  logical  understanding 
than  Nietzsche.  According  to  him  the  whole  method  of 
logical  reasoning  is  without  any  reference  to  reality.  Logic 
is  the  cutting  of  the  world  into  bits.  It  is  not  a  guide  to 
reality.  We  are  driven  to  it  by  fatigue,  not  by  love  of  knowl- 
edge, by  the  Will  to  Power. 

"In  order  to  be  able  to  think  and  to  draw  conclusions,  it 
is  necessary  to  acknowledge  that  which  exists:  Logic  only 
deals  with  formulae  for  things  which  are  constant.  That 
is  why  this  acknowledgment  would  not  in  the  least  prove 
reality:  That  which  is  is  part  of  our  optics."  {The  Will 
to  Power,  II.,  33). 

"  'Truth'  is  the  will  to  be  master  over  the  manifold  sensa- 
tions that  reach  consciousness;  it  is  the  will  to  classify  phe- 
nomena according  to  definite  categories." 

"The  criterion  of  truth  lies  in  the  enhancement  of  the  feel- 
ing of  power. 

"According  to  my  way  of  thinking,  'truth'  does  not  neces- 
sarily mean  the  opposite  of  error,  but  in  the  most  fundamental 
cases,  merely  the  relation  of  different  errors  to  each  other; 
thus  one  error  might  be  older,  deeper  than  another,  perhaps 
altogether  ineradicable,  one  without  which  organic  creatures 
like  ourselves  could  not  exist;  whereas  other  errors  might 
not  tyrannize  over  us  to  that  extent  as  conditions  of  exist- 
ence, but  when  measured  according  to  the  standard  of  those 
other  tyrants  could  even  be  laid  aside."  (The  Will  to  Power, 
IL,49). 

"  'Man  projects  his  instinct  of  truth'  (that  form  of  illusion 
which  enables  one  to  live),  his  'aim,'  to  a  certain  extent  be- 
yond himself,  in  the  form  of  a  metaphysical  world  of  Being, 
a  'thing  in  itself,'  a  world  already  to  hand.  His  require- 
ments as  a  creator  make  him  invent  the  world  in  which  he 
works  in  advance;  he  anticipates  it;  these  anticipations  (this 
faith  in  truth)  is  his  mainstay."   (Ibid,  61). 


Some    Modern   Isms.  183 

He  attempts  to  explain  the  growth  of  intellect  as  a  develop- 
ment of  the  Will  to  Power.  In  the  attempt  he  is  largely 
swayed  by  the  theory  of  biological  evolution,  and  the  belief 
that  intellect  is  itself  a  product  of  those  physical  forces  seen 
in  natural  development. 

At  the  same  time  he  betrays  the  influence  of  Kant  in  mag- 
nifying the  human  forms  involved  in  all  knowledge. 

Again,  denying  the  "thing  in  itself"  he  dragged  it  back 
into  existence  in  the  shape  of  the  Will  Power.  In  other  par- 
ticulars he  shows  the  influence  of  Kant. 

Similarly  Nietzsche,  at  one  time  a  devotee  at  the  shrine 
of  Schopenhauer,  came  violently  to  differ.  Still  he  never 
shook  off  the  influence  of  the  sage  of  pessimism.  Along  with 
Schopenhauer  he  taught  a  monism  of  the  will,  as  Hegel  had 
taught  a  monism  of  thought.  Nietzsche  is  often  utterly  in- 
consistent but  on  the  whole  his  philosophy  is  "monism  with 
the  individual  a  mere  bubble  on  the  stream  of  the  Will  to 
Power."  While  not  a  pessimist  in  the  Schopenhaur  sense 
his  Amor  Fati — love  of  recurrence — is  a  "counsel  of  despair." 
His  differences  with  Schopenhauer  have  been  explained  as 
due  largely  to  what  he  borrowed  from  Charles  Darwin,  whom 
nevertheless  he  also  treated  with  great  professed  contempt. 
"Nietzsche's  conception  of  the  world  as  physiological  de- 
velopment only — ^his  never  ceasing  belief  in  evolution — even 
his  belief  in  the  struggle  for  power  as  the  keyword  to  all  de- 
velopment are  really  Darwin  with  a  difference"  (Figgis,  The 
Will  to  Freedom,  193).  It  is  claimed  that  he  was  proba- 
bly indebted  for  his  notion  of  the  Superman  indirectly  to 
Darwin's  Origin  of  Species.  Dr.  George  Brandes,  who  has 
been  called  the  discoverer  of  Nietzsche,  teaches  that  his 
whole  system  of  ethics  is  merely  the  translation  into  ethical 
terms  of  the  Bismarckian  Era. 

If  he  was  very  marked  for  originality,  the  world  has  been 
slow  to  see  it,  except  in  his  insane  condemnation  of  morality. 


184  Some    Modern   Isms. 

V.  How  does  it  come  about  that  Nietzsche  has  won  so 
considerable  a  follo^ving? 

He  has  won  no  small  following,  not  only  young  men  and 
young  women  who  wish  to  live  free  of  traditional  restraints, 
but  philosophic  "students"  who  differ  with  him  on  some 
points  radically,  and  professed  Christians  who  deny  the 
truth  of  his  central  teachings.  Musicians  and  educators  ad- 
mire him  for  his  introduction  of  them  to  wide  horizons  of 
culture  and  for  his  advocacy  of  the  cultivation  of  positive 
energy.  It  is  said  that  Thus  Spake  Zarathustra  has  reached 
a  circulation  of  about  140,000;  and  that  quite  a  library  of 
books  has  been  written  on  Nietzsche. 

The  explanation  of  the  Nietzsche  vogue  may  be  in  part: 

1st.  The  enthusiastic  dogmatism  with  which  he  sets  forth 
the  views  which  he  for  the  time  holds.  He  appears  to  be 
full  of  dead  certainty  that  his  illusions  are  the  most  useful 
possible  for  human  life.  No  man  ever  thought  more  highly 
of  his  own  mental  children  than  Nietzsche  of  his  "illusions." 
No  man  ever  assumed  a  more  dogmatic  tone.  He  spake  with 
the  air  of  a  prophet.  He  boasted  of  his  prophetic  gift.  He 
blew  his  own  horn  as  no  other  man  ever  did.  In  an  age  of 
negation  the  crowd  is  hungry  for  dogmatic  affirmation. 

2d.  His  imaginative,  romantic,  concrete,  sensuous  way  of 
expressing  himself  has  brought  him  into  favor  with  many 
people.  These  qualities  may  be  illustrated  by  the  Night 
Song  of  Zarathustra: 

"  'Tis  night;  now  do  all  gushing  fountains  speak  louder. 
And  my  soul  also  is  a  gushing  fountain. 

"'Tis  night:  now  only  do  all  songs  of  the  loving  ones 
awake.     And  my  soul  also  is  the  song  of  a  loving  one. 

"Something  unappeased,  unappeasable,  is  within  me;  it 
longeth  to  find  expression.  A  craving  for  love  is  within  me, 
which  speaketh  itself  the  language  of  love. 

"Light  am  I:  ah,  that  I  were  night!  But  it  is  my  lone- 
someness  to  be  begirt  with  light! 


Some   Modern    Isms.  185 

"Ah,  that  I  were  dark  and  nightly!  How  would  I  suck 
at  the  breasts  of  light! 

"And  you  yourselves  would  I  bless,  ye  twinkling  starlets 
and  glow-worms  aloft! — and  would  rejoice  in  the  gifts  of 
your  light. 

"But  I  live  in  mine  own  light,  I  drink  again  into  myself 
the  flames  that  break  forth  from  me. 

"I  know  not  the  happiness  of  the  receiver;  and  oft  have 
I  dreamt  that  stealing  must  be  more  blessed  than  receiving. 

"It  is  my  poverty  that  my  hand  never  ceaseth  bestowing; 
it  is  mine  en\y  that  I  see  waiting  eyes  and  the  brightened 
nights  of  longing. 

"Oh,  the  misery  of  all  bestowers!  Oh,  the  darkening  of 
my  sun!  Oh,  the  craving  to  crave!  Oh,  the  violent  hunger 
in  satiety! 

"They  take  from  me:  but  do  I  yet  touch  their  soul?  There 
is  a  gap  'twixt  giving  and  receiving;  and  the  smallest  gap 
hath  finally  to  be  bridged  over. 

"A  hunger  ariseth  out  of  my  beauty:  I  should  like  to  in- 
jure those  I  illumine;  I  should  like  to  rob  those  I  have 
gifted — thus  do  I  hunger  for  wickedness. 

"Withdrawing  my  hand  when  another  hand  already 
stretcheth  out  to  it;  hesitating  like  the  cascade,  which  hesi- 
tateth  even  in  its  leap — thus  do  I  hunger  for  wickedness! 

"Such  revenge  doth  mine  abundance  think  of:  such  mis- 
chief wclleth  out  of  my  lonesomeness. 

"My  happiness  in  bestowing  died  in  bestowing;  my  virtue 
became  weary  of  itself  by  its  abundance ! 

"He  who  ever  bestoweth  is  in  danger  of  losing  his  shame; 
to  him  who  ever  dispenseth,  the  hand  and  heart  becomes 
callous  by  very  dispensing. 

"Mine  eye  no  longer  overfloweth  for  the  shame  of  sup- 
pliants; my  hand  hath  become  too  hard  for  the  trembling  of 
filled  hands. 


186  Some    Modern    Isms. 

"Whence  have  gone  the  tears  of  mine  eye,  and  the  down 
of  my  heart?  Oh,  the  lonesomeness  of  all  bestowers!  Oh, 
the  silence  of  all  shining  ones! 

"Many  suns  circle  in  desert  space:  to  all  that  is  dark  do 
they  speak  with  their  light — but  to  me  they  are  silent. 

"Oh,  this  is  the  hostility  of  light  to  the  shining  one:  un- 
pityingly  doth  it  pursue  its  course. 

"Unfair  to  the  shining  one  in  its  innermost  heart,  cold  to 
the  suns — thus  travelleth  every  sun. 

"Like  a  storm  do  the  suns  pursue  their  courses:  that  is 
their  travelling.  Their  inexorable  will  do  they  follow:  that 
is  their  coldness. 

"Oh,  ye  only  is  it,  ye  dark,  nightly  ones,  that  extract 
warmth  from  the  shining  ones!  Oh,  ye  only  drink  milk 
and  refreshment  from  the  light's  udders! 

Ah,  there  is  ice  around  me;  my  hand  burneth  with  the  ici- 
ness!     Ah,  there  is  thirst  in  me;  it  panteth  after  your  thirst  I 

" 'Tis  night:  alas,  that  I  have  to  be  light!  And  thirst 
for  the  nightly!     And  lonesomeness! 

"  'Tis  night:  now  doth  my  longing  break  forth  in  me  as 
a  fountain — for  speech  do  I  long. 

"  'Tis  night:  now  do  all  gushing  fountains  speak  louder. 
And  my  soul  also  is  a  gushing  fountain. 

"  'Tis  night:  now  do  all  songs  of  loving  ones  awake. 
And  my  soul  also  is  the  song  of  a  loving  one."  (Thus  Spake 
Zarathustra,  pp.  124-126). 

There  can  hardly  be  a  doubt  that  he  understood  the  value 
of  words,  and  that  he  handled  them  with  the  skill  of  a 
wizard.     He  had  a  good  opinion  of  his  style.     He  says: 

"I  will  now  pass  just  one  or  two  general  remarks  about 
my  art  of  style.  To  communicate  a  state,  an  inner  tension 
of  pathos  by  means  of  signs  including  the  tempo  of  these 
signs — that  is,  the  meaning  of  every  style;  and  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  multiplicity  of  inner  states  in  me  is  enorm- 


Some   Modern   Isms.  187 

ous,   I  am  capable  of  many  kinds  of  style — in  short,  the 
most  multifarious  art  of  style  that  any  man  has  ever  had  at 
his  disposal.     Any  style  is  good  which  genuinely  communi- 
cates an  inner  condition,  which   does  not  blunder  over  the 
signs,  over  the  tempo  of  the  signs,  or  over  moods — all  the 
laws   of  phrasing   are  the   outcome   of   representing   moods 
artistically.     Good  style,  in  itself,  is  a  piece  of  sheer  foolery, 
mere  idealism,  like  'beauty  in  itself,'  for  instance,  or  'good- 
ness in  itself,'  or  'the  thing-in-itself.'     All  this  takes   for 
granted,  of  course,  that  there  exist  ears  that  can  hear,  and 
such  men  as  are  capable  and  worthy  of  a  like  pathos,  that 
those   are  not   wanting  unto   whom   one   may   comm.unicate 
one's  self.     Meanwhile  my  Zarathustra,  for  instance,  is  still 
in  quest  of  such  people — alas  I  he  will  have  to  seek  a  long 
while  yet!    A  man  must  be  worthy  of  listening  to  him.    .    .    . 
And,  until  that  time,  there  will  be  no  one  who  will  under- 
stand the  art  that  has  been  squandered  in  this  book.     No 
one  has  ever  existed  who  has  had  more  novel,  more  strange, 
and  purposely  created  art  forms  to  fling  to  the  winds.     The 
fact  that  such  things  were  possible  in  the  German  language 
still  awaited  proof;   formerly,   I  myself  would  have  denied 
most  emphatically  that  it   was  possible.      Before   my   time 
people  did  not  know  what  could  be  done  with  the  German 
language.      The    art   of   grand    rhythm,    of   grand    style    in 
periods,  for  expressing  the  tremendous  fluctuations  of  sublime 
and  superhuman  passion,  was  first  discovered  by  me:  with 
the  dithyramb  entitled,  'The  Seven  Seals,'  which  constitutes 
the  last  discourse  of  the  third  part  of  Zarathustra,  I  soared 
miles   above   all   that    which    heretofore    has    been    called 
poetry."   (Ecce  Homo,  pp.  62-64). 
Professor  Henri  Lichtenberger  says: 
"His  'writing'  is  so  neat  and  coloured,   so  nervous  and 
flexible,  so  rich  in  picturesque  expressions  and  in  formulae, 
written  and   rewritten,  chiselled  with  exquisite  munuteness 
by  a  virtuoso  of  the  pen." 


188  Some    Modern    Isms. 

There  is  evident  to  the  reader  of  the  English  translations 
a  wierd  music  in  some  of  Nietzsche's  writings.  Pictures, 
too,  troop  upon  the  heels  of  pictures.  When  one  can  forget 
the  soaring  self-magnification,  the  insane  self-deification,  and 
the  Satanic  impiety,  the  lure  of  Nietzsche's  style  is  not  in- 
considerable. His  pages  are  a  rare  picture-show,  scene  fol- 
lowing scene  with  startling  rapidity.  He  had  the  capacity 
of  dealing  even  with  dry  academic  subjects  in  the  freshest 
way,  placing  them  in  beautiful  settings,  and  throwing  them 
into  sensuous  dress. 

3d.  He  had  the  power  of  camouflaging  the  essentials  of  a 
subject  with  which  he  was  dealing.  In  other  words,  he  was 
a  sophist  of  the  first  water.  In  profession  he  eschewed  dia- 
lectic. In  practise  he  was  greatly  given  to  a  false  dialectic. 
Thus,  in  picturing  Christ  he  takes  for  his  materials  those 
passages  in  which  Christ  has  been  thought,  by  some,  to  teach 
the  doctrine  of  non-resistance — takes  them  as  teaching  non- 
resistance — passes  by  the  stern  side  of  Christ,  and,  conse- 
quently, pictures  him  as  a  teacher  of  non-resistance  pure  and 
simple.  Thus  also,  when  opposing  a  series  of  arguments 
against  a  position  he  would  maintain,  he  demolishes  the 
weak  and  worthless  so  effectually  as  to  make  the  superficial 
reader  forget  the  strong  arguments  which  he  leaves  discreet- 
ly untouched.     He  thus  misleads  many  silly  sheep. 

4th.  Dr.  Figgis  asserts  that  Nietzsche  has  power  with 
men  because  he  delivers  them  from  the  tyranny  not  only 
of  the  heaven  above,  but  of  the  earth  beneath;  because  he 
teaches  them  to  live  as  though  nothing  were  inevitable,  as 
masters  and  not  slaves  of  the  universe,  to  find  in  it,  even 
if  they  are  worsted,  a  noble  foe,  to  be  ready  for  the  new, 
the  unknown,  the  exceptional,  to  climb  daily  fresh  Alpine 
heights  of  danger — enslaved  neither  to  priest  nor  to  philoso- 
pher, nor  even  to  scientific  dogmatist.  He  says:  "Jacob 
earned  his  royal  title  by  wrestling  with  a  supernatural  be- 


Some    Modern    Isms.  189 

ing:  Nietzsche,  who  denies  the  supernatural,  would  win  for 
his  pupils  a  like  principality  by  teaching  them  to  wrestle 
with  natural  reality.  Rightly  or  wrongly,  many  have  won 
this  way  a  sense  of  freedom,  of  the  worth  of  life  and  of 
trying"  (Figgis,  The  Will  to  Freedom,  p.  240-241).  Yet  Dr. 
Figgis  himself  teaches  rightly  that  Nietzsche's  cardinal  te- 
nets deny  the  possibility  of  this  very  freedom. 

Figgis  further  claims  that  Nietzsche  was  the  John  the 
Baptist  of  the  Twentieth  Century — a  new  age: 

"  'Repent,'  he  might  cry,  'of  your  absurd  morality.  Rend 
all  your  garments,  and  live  naked  to  the  real  wind.  Rid 
yourself  of  shams;  away  with  your  conventional  lies,  your 
worship  of  comfort,  your  domestic  pettiness,  and  above  all 
your  wallowing  in  pity.  Be  something.  Look  down,  down  on 
the  herd,  which  you  disown.  Kill  all  this  sentimental  cul- 
ture, this  passion  for  the  past,  and  join  in  the  great  gamble 
for  the  future,  when  every  valley  shall  be  a  gulf,  and  every 
hill  a  Himalaya;  when  the  crooked  shall  be  twisted  round, 
and  the  rough  places  become  rocks.  For  Man,  Man  alone, 
shall  be  exalted  in  that  day — for  the  Superman  cometh,  he 
Cometh  to  judge  the  world,  and  with  violence  shall  he  rule 
the  world  and  reprove  with  terror  for  the  proud  of  the  car^h.' 

"This  note  of  appeal  to  the  will,  this  sense  that  man- 
kind is  in  the  making,  ushered  in  the  twentieth  century. 
The  spirit  of  scepticism,  of  decadence  had  hold  of  many, 
or  else  a  mere  conservatism,  Nietzsche  was  like  the  wild 
northeaster,  and  he  was,  in  his  own  words,  'the  voice  of 
the  day  after  tomorrow.'  "  (Figgis,  The  Will  to  Freedom, 
pp.  250-251.  Cp.  Ibid.,  263). 

5th.  Without  doubt  his  preaching  of  the  class  distinction 
between  slave  men  and  master  men  has  been  a  trump  card 
with  junkers,  and  men  anywhere  suffering  under  the  delu- 
sion of  being  "master  men,"  or  possibly  supennen.  It  has 
been  grateful  to  their  egotism.     They  wish  to  see  the  age 


190  Some   Modern   Isms. 

of  Dionysius  come  and  the  age  of  Christianity  go — the  age 
of  the  mastery  of  master  men  come  and  the  age  of  regard 
for  weaklings  and  slaves  go;  because  forsooth  they  are  the 
master  men. 

6th.  His  immoralism  has  given  him  popularity  with  some. 

It  enables  the  reader  to  bait  Christians,  and  to  deluge  with 
contempt  solemn  academic  moralists,  who  bethink  themselves 
in  no  wise  indebted  to  Christianity,  though  teaching  its 
ethics.  It  enables  some  to  give  loose  reign  to  every  lust 
deemed  fitted  to  build  them  up  in  bodily  efficiency  or  any 
other  sort  of  mastery. 

Nietzsche  is  the  apostle  of  positive  ungodliness  in  revolt 
against  the  negative  ungodliness  of  the  scientists,  philoso- 
phers, and  critics  of  the  nineteenth  century.  He  was  not 
only  an  open  foe  to  Godliness,  but  he  was  a  foe  to  this 
negative  ungodliness.  These  critics  had  taken  away  the 
world's  stimulus  to  life.  Nietzsche  did  not  restore  the  true 
stimulus — the  Christian  faith,  hope  and  love.  Woe  is  his 
that  he  did  not.  Into  this  negatively  ungodly  world  he 
threw  his  stimulus,  the  hope  of  bringing  in  the  Superman. 

7th.  In  .short,  Nietzsche  had  the  kind  of  stuff  vast  num- 
bers of  people  in  this  age  want — ungodly,  atheistic,  amoral, 
or  immoral,  dogmatic  humbuggery — arid  and  bitter,  desert 
sands  in  which  they  can  bury  their  ostrich  heads — that  not 
beholding  the  great  realities  of  life,  they  may  live  as  though 
these  realities  were  not. 

VI.   What  sort  of  fruits  may  be  looked  for  from  Nietzsche? 

1.  The  trampling  of  moral  obligation  in  the  dust. 

If  morality  be  due  simply  to  the  herd  instinct,  if  the 
Superman  is  to  be  beyond  good  and  evil  every  asinus  hominis 
who  fancies  himself  a  master  man,  will  tend  to  act  as  a 
Caesar  Borgia,  or  a  Napoleon,  as  the  Junkers  of  Germany 
acted  in  Belgium  and  northern  France — to  use  any  means 
by  which  his  ends  may  be  accomplished.     Man  can  only  be- 


Some   Modern    Isms.  191 

come  great  at  the  cost  of  becoming  morally  terrible  accord- 
ing to  Nietzsche. 

"Man  is  a  combination  of  the  beast  and  the  super-beast; 
higher  man  a  combination  of  the  monster  and  the  Super- 
man; these  opposites  belong  to  each  other.  With  every  de- 
gree of  a  man's  growth  towards  greatness  and  loftiness  he 
also  grows  downward  into  the  depths  and  into  the  terrible. 
We  should  not  desire  the  one  without  the  other;  or,  better 
still,  the  more  fundamentally  we  desire  the  one,  the  more 
completely  we  shall  achieve  the  other. 

"Terribleness  belongs  to  greatness:  Let  us  not  deceive 
ourselves."  (The  Will  to  Power,  405). 

Their  acceptance  of  his  philosophy  would  explain  all  the 
sensual  barbarism  displayed  by  the  German  armies  during 
the  past  four  years.  In  further  confirmation  of  this  hear  his 
words : 

"The  state,  or  unmorality  organized,  is  from  within — the 
police;  the  penal  code,  status,  commerce,  and  the  family; 
and  from  without,  the  will  to  war,  to  power,  to  conquest,  to 
revenge. 

"A  multitude  will  do  things  an  individual  will  not,  be- 
cause of  the  division  of  responsibility,  of  command,  and  of 
execution;  because  the  virtues  of  obedience,  duty,  patriotism 
and  local  sentiment  are  all  introduced;  because  feelings  of 
pride,  severity,  strength,  hate  and  revenge — in  short,  all 
typical  traits  are  upheld,  and  these  are  characteristics  utterly 
alien  to  the  herd-man."   (Will  to  Power,  184). 

"The  maintenance  of  the  military  state  is  the  last  means 
of  adhering  to  the  great  tradition  of  the  past,  or  where  it 
has  been  lost,  to  revive  it.  By  means  of  it,  the  superior  or 
strong  type  of  man  is  preserved,  and  all  institutions  and 
ideas  which  perpetuate  enmity  and  order  of  rank  in  states, 
such  as  national  feeling,  protective  tariffs,  etc.,  may  on 
that  account  seem  justified." 


192  Some   Modern    Isms. 

He  justifies  beforehand  every  Machiavellian  diplomatic 
move,  the  making  of  treaties  to  be  treated  as  scraps  of  paper, 
and  all  beastliness  of  which  Germany  has  been  guilty. 

2d.  This  world  war — a  war  for  world  dominion  is  the 
fruit  of  his  teaching,  in  part.  He  predicted  it  and  furthered 
it  by  his  teaching  of  amorality,  his  unceasing  exhortation 
to  the  master  class,  to  will  to  power,  and  by  his  magnifica- 
tion beyond  m.easure  of  the  inequality  of  races  and  indi- 
viduals and  his  recognition  of  authority  in  any  man's  hands 
as  in  direct  proportion  to  his  power  to  secure  the  carrying 
out  of  his  wishes. 

VII.  What  incidental  benefits  has  Nietzsche  conferred  on 
Christianity  ? 

He  has  given  occasions  for  Christians  to  see, 

1st.  That  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  Christian  ethical 
standards  without  the  Christian  faith,  that  the  ethics  and 
doctrines  are  parts  of  one  whole. 

2d.  That  hatred  to  the  Christian  faith  on  the  part  of  the 
natural  man  is  a  fact,  that  it  will  show  itself  in  persecution 
again,  as  it  has  done  before  in  case  the  type  of  Christianity 
becomes  decided,  and  the  natural  man  have  the  opportunity. 

3d.  That  Christians,  who  profess  to  regard  their  fellows 
as  equally  entitled  to  life,  liberty,  and  religion  with  them- 
selves, should  treat  their  fellows  practically  as  if  they  be- 
lieved it. 

5th.  That  the  Church  and  the  world  should  be  clearly 
demarked. 

6th.  That  Nietzsche  should  be  regarded  as  symptomatic 
of  the  time — a  period  of  pagan-reaction  against  Christianity. 

7th.  That  he  has,  by  his  caricature  of  Christianity  occa- 
sioned a  return  from  the  Christianity  that  regards  God  as 
an  indulgent  old  grandmother  to  a  Christianity  with  a  God 
merciful  and  terrible. 


Date  Due 

Je   2c  '3 

VAOil: 

If  27  •» 

^    "^  ••'      — * 

'i 

i; 

'%S:,  IS 

My  11  i- 

Ikki.  u. 

Ap  te. 

£; 

— ^  3  'i 

Ji  6-   'i^ 

r                    '•       1 

AV-     -- 

i 

^•f   '■'  ' '    '^ 

%AnULT^ 

/ 

AJr  ..  ^ 

L'Ul  3n'5R 

Ap  2  s 

»W»»gfp. 

|v 

^::2g^ft 

f) 

